DRAFT AGENDA
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 | |||||||||
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 |
|||||||||
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). None |
|||||||||
8. | LIQUOR LICENSE PUBLIC HEARINGS None |
|||||||||
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. | Consideration and Approval of Sole Source Purchase: Solid Waste Route Management and Logistics Software offered by WM Logistics, LLC (Approve purchase of solid waste route management and logistics software). | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the purchase of solid waste route management & logistics software from WM Logistics, LLC in the amount of $26,710 first year, $46,690 second year & $46,690 third year for a total of $120,090.
|
||||||||||
B. | Consideration and Approval of Cooperative Contract: Consideration to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for cooperative purchasing services with five (5) agencies that are members of the Flagstaff Alliance for the Second Century (FASC), as follows: Flagstaff Unified School District, Northern Arizona University, Coconino County, City of Flagstaff and Coconino County Community College. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
10. | ROUTINE ITEMS | |||||||||
A. | Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-24: An ordinance of the Flagstaff City Council authorizing the City of Flagstaff to accept specific deeds of real property and easements and providing for the repeal of conflicting ordinances, severability, and authority for clerical corrections, and establishing an effective date. (Approval of an ordinance accepting deeds and easements of real property obtained by the City through grants and donations). | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2014-24 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-24 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-24 |
||||||||||
B. |
Consideration and Approval of Grant Agreement: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency Cooperating Technical Partners award number EMW-2014-CA-00087-S01: Watershed Management Plan and Flood Risk Report for the Rio De Flag Watercourse (Approve Grant Agreement with Dept. of Homeland Security-FEMA). |
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the application to Federal Emergency Management (FEMA) for grant funds in the amount of $200,000 and a non-federal commitment/leverage of $98,198.
|
||||||||||
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 | |||||
A. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-30: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona, extending and increasing the corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, Coconino County, State of Arizona, pursuant to the provisions of Title 9, Chapter 4, Arizona Revised Statues, by annexing certain land totaling approximately 3.14 acres located at 2701 S. Woody Mountain Road, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff and establishing city zoning for said land as RR, Rural Residential. (Annexation of property for Aspen Heights located on Woody Mountain Road) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
At the October 21, 2014 Council Meeting:
1) Hold Public Hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title only for the first time 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title only for the first time (if approved above) At the November 3, 2014 Council Meeting: 4) Read Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title for the final time 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title only for the final time (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-30 |
||||||
B. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-31: An Ordinance amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map designation of approximately 36.94 acres of real property generally located at the intersection of Route 66 and Woody Mountain Road, from Rural Residential ("RR") to Highway Commercial ("HC") for 3.6 acres, and to Medium Density Residential ("MR") for 33.33 acres. (Rezoning of property for Aspen Heights located on Woody Mountain Road) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
At the October 21, 2014 Council Meeting:
1) Hold Public Hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title only for the first time 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title for the first time (if approved above) At the November 3, 2014 Council Meeting: 4) Read Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title only for the final time 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title for the final time (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-31 |
||||||
C. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-35 and Ordinance No. 2014-27: Public hearing to consider proposed amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), specifically Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), and related amendments to Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions), and Chapter 10-90 (Maps); consideration of Resolution No. 2014-35 declaring the proposed amendments as a public record; and adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-27, adopting amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), specifically Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions), and Chapter 10-90 (Maps), by reference. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
At the Council Meeting of October 21, 2014 |
||||||
15. | REGULAR AGENDA | |||||
A. | Consideration and Approval of a Preliminary Plat request from Mogollon Engineering & Surveying, Inc., on behalf of Pinnacle 146 LLC, for a subdivision of approximately 18.59 acres into 106 single-family residential townhouse lots located at 800 E Sterling Lane within the Medium Density Residential (MR) zone. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council approved the Preliminary Plat subject to one condition. |
||||||
B. | Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-37: A resolution of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, Coconino County, Arizona, repealing Resolution No. 2013-01 which adopted the Board and Commission Members' Handbook, and adopting the 2014 Board and Commission Members' Rules and Operations Manual | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-37 by tittle only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-37 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-37 |
||||||
16. | DISCUSSION ITEMS |
|||||
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 | |||||
|
9.A.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Sole Source Purchase: Solid Waste Route Management and Logistics Software offered by WM Logistics, LLC (Approve purchase of solid waste route management and logistics software). | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the purchase of solid waste route management & logistics software from WM Logistics, LLC in the amount of $26,710 first year, $46,690 second year & $46,690 third year for a total of $120,090.
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The Solid Waste Section has researched industry specific software for route management, collections and logistics for approximately six (6) years. After reviewing products offered by all vendors with industry specific software, it has been determined that WM Logistics is the only (Sole Source) vendor who has a complete package that can meet all of the Solid Waste Section's needs and requirements. Subsidiary Decisions Points: 1. WM Logistics provides five (5) different modules specific to solid waste collection vs. other companies who only have two to three standard modules. No other company had developed their system fully and relied on other logistic software companies to provide different aspects to complete the software system. 2. WM Logistics is the only company with an automated route logistics known as a "One-Touch" intuitive system. 3. WM Logistics is the only company that did not need company-specific proprietary hardware in the trucks. This will allow the City to purchase tablets for their software system from any local store and likely save money from hardware-specific equipment. 4. WM Logistics can utilize the cloud, with an Oracle database, which they maintain. This saves the City money from having to purchase an additional server and staff time to maintain and back up an operating system that Information Technology (IT) staff is trying to phase out. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The purchase and implementation of this software will produce significant savings in operational and capital costs. These savings will pay for the cost of acquiring and using this software, as well as future savings by reducing the need to purchase and replace as many collection vehicles. Productivity and efficiency increases will allow for reductions of fleet and related fleet capital costs as well. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
11. Effective governance | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No. To date, there has not been any previous Council presentation or discussion. |
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Purchase the software from WM Logistics for the specified time period at the price offered. 2. Do not purchase any routing / logistics software at this time. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Solid Waste Section has been researching and reviewing software products designed for solid waste collection for about six (6) years. The use of such an "industry specific" product would increase current productivity and operational efficiency while producing significant savings. Additionally, it would allow for a reduction of fleet vehicles (collections equipment) producing immediate savings as well as future cost reductions in fleet replacement. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
After researching and viewing demonstrations of every major manufacturer of route management/ logistics software, Solid Waste staff determined that WM Logistics is a sole source provider of a product that meets the City's Solid Waste section needs and requirements. The product would have value for other Sections or Divisions as well, as there are modules available for street sweeping, plowing operations and other relevant route functions that would be supported by this technology interface. The Vendor (WM Logistics) will host, install, set up, maintain and back up the system, eliminating the need for the City's own IT Section to purchase and maintain a new server. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
The Solid Waste section has had $134,000 budgeted for technology to improve productivity and operational efficiency. The software offered by WM Logistics, LLC will cost $120,090 over the next three (3) years. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The benefit to the community is improved efficiency of the Solid Waste Collection system, keeping ongoing costs to provide services lower by using technology to enhance operational capacity and planning that benefits the City's Solid Waste taxpaying customers. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Purchase the software offered by WM Logistics, LLC 2. Do not purchase any route management/ logistics software at this time. |
|||||
Attachments: | Sole Source Document | ||||
Professional Services Agreement | |||||
Hosting Agreement | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
9.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Cooperative Contract: Consideration to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for cooperative purchasing services with five (5) agencies that are members of the Flagstaff Alliance for the Second Century (FASC), as follows: Flagstaff Unified School District, Northern Arizona University, Coconino County, City of Flagstaff and Coconino County Community College. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
|
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Consideration of this IGA will provide procurement related opportunities to sponsor, conduct and/or administer a cooperative agreement for the procurement or disposal of any materials, services or construction. Reduced fiscal resources have created an environment that supports increased and greater levels of cooperation for the procurement of various materials, services and construction. The proposed IGA establishes procedures for the FASC to participate in procurement related activities and encourages FASC cooperation whenever possible to increase purchasing power and can provide better value in the expense of public resources. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Effective governance | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Back in September of 1994, the City Council and five (5) participating members of the FASC (Flagstaff Unified School District, Northern Arizona University, Coconino County, City of Flagstaff and Coconino County Community College), approved the first IGA put in place for cooperative purchasing services for a ten (10) year period; which expired in September of 2004. The IGA was renewed by all five (5) participating members of the FASC for an additional ten (10) year period; which expired in September of 2014. All five (5) participating members of the FASC are in agreement to renew this IGA for another ten (10) year period and each member is taking this IGA to their respective Council or Board for formal action and the IGA shall be executed in counterpart. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1.) The City Council may approve this IGA. 2.) The City Council may decline to enter into this new IGA. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
This IGA was first approved by all of the five (5) participating members of the FASC (Flagstaff Unified School District, Northern Arizona University, Coconino County, City of Flagstaff and Coconino County Community College) back in September of 1994 for a ten (10) year period. Then in September of 2004, this IGA was renewed for another ten (10) years through September of 2014 and is now expired. All five (5) participating members of the FASC are interested in renewing this IGA for another ten (10) year period; which would expire in September of 2024. | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The ultimate goal of this IGA is to lower contract pricing through volume bidding that help leverage our purchasing power and to obtain maximum service quality provided by contracted vendors. Other objectives are to reduce duplication of bidding efforts, to provide for monthly networking opportunities and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the public procurement process. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
None | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
This IGA will allow participating members of the FASC to pool their resources in an effort to lower contract pricing through volume bidding that help leverage our purchasing power and to obtain maximum service quality provided by contracted vendors. In addition, this IGA will allow for more efficient use of personnel through the reduction of duplication of bidding efforts. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | Intergovernmental Agreement | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
10.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-24: An ordinance of the Flagstaff City Council authorizing the City of Flagstaff to accept specific deeds of real property and easements and providing for the repeal of conflicting ordinances, severability, and authority for clerical corrections, and establishing an effective date. (Approval of an ordinance accepting deeds and easements of real property obtained by the City through grants and donations). | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2014-24 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-24 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-24 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Real property, whether in fee or in easement form, is often acquired during the development review process through dedication or donation. These acquisitions may be for drainage, utilities, the urban trails system, slopes, rights of way or other public purposes. The City Charter, in Article VII Section 5, requires the City to acquire real property by ordinance. The approval of this ordinance will formally accept the real property donated or dedicated to the city through the development review process or as necessary for an approved capital improvements project. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
Real property is considered a fixed asset in the city. Until City Council approves an ordinance accepting the acquisition that value is not recognized in an audit so while there is no actual financial expenditure associated with these acquisitions, there is a fixed asset value the city receives through this action. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS:
1. Repair Replace maintain infrastructure (streets & utilities) 11. Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN: Goal OS.1 The region has a system of open lands, such as undeveloped 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. Goal WR.4 Logically enhance and extend the City's public water, wastewater, and reclaimed water services including their treatment, distribution and collection systems in both urbanized and newly developed areas of the City to provide an efficient delivery of services. Goal WR.5 Manage watersheds and stormwater to address flooding concerns, water quality, environmental protections and rainwater harvesting. Goal LU.7 Provide for public services and infrastructure Goal T.4 Promote transportation infrastructure and services that enhance the quality of life of the communities within the region. 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: | |||||
An ordinance accepting pervious dedications and donations was approved in March of 2012. First read of this ordinance was held at the October 7, 2014, Council Meeting. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve Ordinance No. 2014-24 and accept the dedicated and donated real property into City of Flagstaff ownership. 2) Approve Ordinance No. 2014-24 after removing specific acquisitions and accept the remaining dedicated and donated real property into City of Flagstaff ownership. 3) Not approve Ordinance No. 2014-24 and not accept the dedicated and donated real property under consideration. This will nullify the dedication or donation and the grantor will retain ownership. It will also remove protections for utilities, urban trails, drainage and other property rights purposes. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
Real property is acquired by the city, as necessary, when developments come through the permitting and review process. These properties can be easements to allow for a specific purpose such as a utility line or a drainage area, or they can be actual property received through a deed for rights of way or the protection of open space. The policy for city acceptance of these dedications is governed both by the charter and by internal process. Exhibit A of the ordinance lists the 62 dedications received. For the executed documents regarding a specific dedication one can use the listed document number to view it through the Coconino County Recorders Office. The City Charter, in Article VII Section 5, requires that all real property be acquired by ordinance. The most recent ordinance accepting donated and dedicated land was Ordinance 2012-12 which accepted real property acquired by donation or dedication prior to March 31, 2012. Ordinance 2014-24 accepts all the real property donated or dedicated since that time. There is also an internal staff process for receiving donations and dedications which involves numerous internal stakeholders to ensure proper protection of the City including:
There are 62 dedications with a square foot total of close to 429,658. The smallest is a 64 square foot drainage easement and the largest is a Public Utility Easement which is 57,935 square feet. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Real property is acquired throughout the year by donation and dedication necessary to achieve the Council and Regional Plan goals and to ensure utilities, roads, and specialized areas are properly protected. All real property must be acquired by ordinance per the City Charter. There is a due diligence process that each acquisition goes through to ensure it is donated or dedicated properly and that the City's interests are protected. Ordinance 2012-24 will accept the real property already received and recorded since March 31, 2012. These acquisitions are necessary for the provision of services as the community grows and the liability assumed is consistent with these same real property rights throughout the community. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits of the acceptance of the parcels includes proper protection for rights determined necessary for utilities, urban trail systems, drainages, slopes, open spaces, rights of way and others. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | Ord. 2014-24 | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
10.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||||||||
Consideration and Approval of Grant Agreement: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency Cooperating Technical Partners award number EMW-2014-CA-00087-S01: Watershed Management Plan and Flood Risk Report for the Rio De Flag Watercourse (Approve Grant Agreement with Dept. of Homeland Security-FEMA). |
|||||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||||||||
Approve the application to Federal Emergency Management (FEMA) for grant funds in the amount of $200,000 and a non-federal commitment/leverage of $98,198.
|
|||||||||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||||||||
Approval of this Grant will result in the necessary funding to develop comprehensive hydrologic and hydraulic models for the Rio De Flag. The models will be used for modeling watershed changes and various scenarios including: effects of catastrophic wildfire, development, capital improvement feasibility, planning, watershed protection and restoration, flood potential, floodplain mapping, climate change and resiliency. The scope also includes some specific items related to these variables. The models will be made available to the scientific and academic communities as well as the County. The result will be state-of-the-art models that can be used for many purposes by the entire community. | |||||||||||
Financial Impact: | |||||||||||
The Grant requires a non-federal fund commitment/leverage of $98,198 which was provided by the City through prior expenditures for the LIDAR aerial photography. There will be a minor amount of staff time to maintain the models. The Stormwater Work Program can accommodate this additional demand. It is anticipated that the model will actually reduce staff time in the future due to the capabilities of the model. | |||||||||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||||||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1. Repair Replace maintain infrastructure (drainage) 2. Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN:
|
|||||||||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||||||||
No. | |||||||||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||||||||
Approve the Grant. Decline the Grant. |
|||||||||||
Background/History: | |||||||||||
FEMA has made this funding available through the Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) Program. This is a one-time grant provided to prepare state-of-the-art hydrologic and hydraulic models. |
|||||||||||
Key Considerations: | |||||||||||
The Grant provides an opportunity to develop a comprehensive tool for the management of the Rio De Flag watershed. The effort is completely funded by FEMA. |
|||||||||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||||||||
The Grant does not technically require a match of City funds. It has been indicated that the city completed LIDAR (photography and contours) is provided as leverage. Some stormwater staff time will be necessary for model development and maintenance. The stormwater work program can provide for the necessary staff time. Model computer storage needs are anticipated to be minimal. | |||||||||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||||||||
The models will benefit the community in a number of ways. The models will be used for modeling watershed changes and various scenarios including: effects of catastrophic wildfire, development, capital improvement feasibility, planning, watershed protection and restoration, flood potential, floodplain mapping, climate change and resiliency. The scope also includes some specific items related to these variables. The models will be made available to the scientific and academic communities as well as the County. The result will be state-of-the-art models that can be used for many purposes by the entire community. |
|||||||||||
Community Involvement: | |||||||||||
Inform: The scientific community and the County have met with the City to discuss the outcomes and uses of the models. The models will be used by these parties to assess their individual needs as well as provide additional data for model development. Involve: the models will be used for purposes that include information to the public regarding flooding, causes of flooding and mitigations. Collaborate: Partner with NAU, County, Forest Service, USGS, NWS, Soil Conservation Service and others. |
|||||||||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||||||||
Approve the Grant. Decline the Grant. With no City match required, and minor city resource necessary, there are no reasons to decline the Grant. |
|||||||||||
Attachments: | FEMA CTP Grant Agreement #EMW-2014-CA-00087 | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
14.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-30: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona, extending and increasing the corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, Coconino County, State of Arizona, pursuant to the provisions of Title 9, Chapter 4, Arizona Revised Statues, by annexing certain land totaling approximately 3.14 acres located at 2701 S. Woody Mountain Road, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff and establishing city zoning for said land as RR, Rural Residential. (Annexation of property for Aspen Heights located on Woody Mountain Road) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the October 21, 2014 Council Meeting:
1) Hold Public Hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title only for the first time 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title only for the first time (if approved above) At the November 3, 2014 Council Meeting: 4) Read Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title for the final time 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title only for the final time (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-30 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The Flagstaff Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a Public Hearing to consider this Annexation request at its regular meeting on September 24, 2014. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted (6-0) to forward the request to the City Council with a recommendation of approval. Annexations are required to be adopted by ordinance. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: Retain, expand, and diversify economic base Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN: The current application was filed prior to the ratification of the Flagstaff Regional Plan 2030 (FRP 2030) and is therefore being reviewed against the policies of the Flagstaff Area Regional Land Use and Transportation Plan (RLUTP). LU1.6 - Require Urban Development to Locate within City Boundaries: In order to ensure that all urban development can be provided with adequate public facilities and services, all urban land uses shall be located within the Urban Growth boundary and within the City’s corporate boundary limits. The Regional Plan encourages urban land uses to locate only within incorporated areas in order to obtain City services, utilities, and fire protection. The City shall consider the annexation of land into the city limits when the annexation of such property is consistent with the goals and policies of the Regional Land Use and Transportation Plan. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
None | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
The City Council may approve the ordinance as proposed, approve the ordinance with conditions, or deny the ordinance. | |||||
Background/History: | |||||
A request by Aspen Heights to annex approximately 3.14 acres at the intersection of East Route 66 and Woody Mountain Road. The area subject to the annexation is a portion of parcel 112-01-019. This parcel is currently vacant and was at one time heavily forested before the Woody Fire in 2006. The parcel is located within the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) Zone and still maintains forest resources towards the southern portion of the property. The parcel is located within the Urban Service Boundary and this small portion of the overall parcel is within County jurisdiction. The current application was filed prior to the adoption of the Flagstaff Regional Plan 2030 (FRP 2030) and is therefore being reviewed against the policies of the Flagstaff Area Regional Land Use and Transportation Plan (RLUTP). For comparison purposes only, policies from both plans are identified and discussed. The RLUTP designates this parcel as Mixed-Use. This land use category requires an average density of seven dwelling units per acre. The Mixed-Use category may have an emphasis on either residential or non-residential. The objective of this classification is to mix land uses by providing housing, shopping, and employment. However, this category does not preclude single-use developments. The FRP 2030 designates this parcel as Future Urban within an Urban Activity Center. The density range required for residential mixed-use is eight dwelling units per acre and a minimum floor area ratio of 1.0 or greater. This annexation is the first of a two-step process. The second being a Concept Zoning Map Amendment request to zone the parcel to the MR, Medium Density Residential Zone (33.33 acres) for a student housing development and the HC, Highway Commercial Zone (3.60 acres) for future commercial development. The Zoning Map Amendment application is being processed concurrently with this application but will not become effective until after the annexation has been completed. A full Zoning Map Amendment policy analysis can be found in that staff report. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Annexations are adopted by the City Council via ordinance. Ordinance No. 2014-30 annexes 3.14 acres located at 2701 S. Woody Mountain Road into the City of Flagstaff. Prior to the second read of Ordinance No. 2014-30 the City Council will approve an Annexation and Development Agreement for the Aspen Heights project. A copy of the draft development agreement is attached for review.
|
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and considerations related to this request are addressed in more detail in the attached Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report, dated September 12, 2014. The existing City of Flagstaff boundary bisects the current parcel limiting the development of the site. The majority of the existing parcel is located within the City of Flagstaff boundaries and the annexation will result in a correction of the City limits to allow for appropriate development of the subject site. The proposed development will require a proportional- share contribution to a future traffic signal at the intersection of Route 66 and S. Woody Mountain Road per the results of the accepted traffic impact analysis. In addition, approximately 5500 linear feet of sewer line will need to be upgraded in conjunction with the proposed development. The Applicant has indicated their desire to participate in the recapture program. The proposed development plans to off-set recreation impacts associated with the project by providing substantial recreation improvements on site in compliance with the City of Flagstaff Zoning Code. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform/Consult The Applicant held a neighborhood meeting on Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 5:30 pm. The Applicant received two phone calls from their meeting notice requesting information about the project. Seven people attended the meeting and had questions in regards to the case. None of the attendees expressed opposition to the Annexation or the Zoning Map Amendment. Staff has not received any other comments in regards to either the annexation or the Zoning Map Amendment. Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council are conducted in conjunction with any request for Zoning Map Amendment. In accordance with Arizona Revised Statute, notice of the public hearing was provided by placing an ad in the Daily Sun, posting a notice on the property, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. As of this writing, staff has received two email letters, copies of which are attached to this report, wanting to make sure that the planning for the site takes into account the use of Woody Mountain Road by a large number of W.L. Gore employees who commute to the facilities in the area and expressing concern about the increased lighting impacts from higher density development within Lighting Zone I. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on September 24, 2014 at 4 p.m. Three individuals spoke in regards to this case. Two addressed concerns in regards to dark sky related issues and the impacts of outdoor lighting. One individual asked for additional information in regards to the provision of affordable housing. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Attachments: | P&Z Commission Staff Report | ||||
Annexation Application | |||||
Annexation Legal Description | |||||
Zoning Map with City limits | |||||
Annexation Public Hearing Notices | |||||
P&Z Commission Draft Minutes | |||||
Ord. 2014-30 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
14.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-31: An Ordinance amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map designation of approximately 36.94 acres of real property generally located at the intersection of Route 66 and Woody Mountain Road, from Rural Residential ("RR") to Highway Commercial ("HC") for 3.6 acres, and to Medium Density Residential ("MR") for 33.33 acres. (Rezoning of property for Aspen Heights located on Woody Mountain Road) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the October 21, 2014 Council Meeting:
1) Hold Public Hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title only for the first time 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title for the first time (if approved above) At the November 3, 2014 Council Meeting: 4) Read Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title only for the final time 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title for the final time (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-31 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The Flagstaff Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a Public Hearing to consider this zoning map amendment at its regular meeting on September 24, 2014. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted (6-0) to forward the required to the City Council with a recommendation of approval subject to ten (10) conditions of approval. Zoning map amendments are required to be adopted by ordinance. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: Retain, expand, and diversify economic base Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN: Goal LU1 (Land Use and Growth Management) “Greater Flagstaff will have a compact land use pattern within a well-defined boundary that shapes growth in a manner that preserves the region’s natural environment, livability, and sense of community. Flagstaff will continue to offer the primary types of housing design developments that have defined its land use patterns: the conventional and traditional neighborhood scale which provide a choice of housing types and supporting non-residential uses within walking distances.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-5) Policy LU1.5 – Provide for new Mixed-Use Neighborhoods. “The Regional Plan designates new development areas within the Urban Growth Boundary for development as mixed-use neighborhoods. The criteria for these areas includes average densities, a mix of mutually supportive and integrated residential and non-residential land uses, and a network of interconnected streets, and pedestrian and bicycle connections.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-9) Policy LU1.6 – Require Urban Development to Locate within City Boundaries. “In order to ensure that all urban development can be provided with adequate public facilities and services, it is the policy of this Regional Plan that all urban land uses shall be located within the Urban Growth Boundary, within the city’s corporate boundary limits. The Regional Plan encourages urban land uses to locate only within incorporated areas in order to obtain City services, utilities, and fire protection. The City shall consider the annexation of land into the city limits when the annexation of such property is consistent with the goals and policies of the RLTUP. (RLUTP, pg. 2-10) Policy LU1.10 – Place Emphasis on all Transportation Modes. “All commercial and residential areas shall include full accommodation for pedestrians, bicycle travel and transit access.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-13) Policy LU1.11 – Place Emphasis on and Encourage Traditional Neighborhood Development and Redevelopment Design. “The Regional Plan promotes the creation and establishment of neighborhood units with mixed land uses, a variety of dwelling types, activity centers that are walkable, alternate modes of transportation routes, and design that is sensitive to existing surrounding development.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-13) Goal C1 (Commercial Development) “Shopping and service areas will be convenient to residents as well as visitors to the region in a manner that meets their needs, while remaining compatible with surrounding land uses.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-21) Policy C1.3 – Include a Mix of Uses in new Commercial Development and Redevelopment. “New development shall include a mix of uses in the city and county, avoiding large, single-use buildings and dominating parking areas.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-22) Policy C1.5 – Design and Establish Neighborhood Commercial Centers. “Neighborhood commercial centers in the city are designed as pedestrian-oriented gathering places with a mix of retail, office, and service uses, providing the goods and services necessary to meet the needs of the neighborhood while reflecting the identity and character of the surrounding residential neighborhoods.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-23) Goal HN1 (Housing and Neighborhoods) “The supply of affordable home ownership, rental, and special needs housing units affordable to low- and moderate-income households will be increased.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-30) Goal HN2 (Housing and Neighborhoods) “New neighborhoods will be built and support will be given to existing neighborhoods that integrate a variety of housing types and densities with amenities, services, and retail to ensure opportunities for a variety of household income levels.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-32) Policy HN2.1 – Promote Development of Mixed-Use Neighborhoods. “In appropriate areas, both new and existing neighborhoods should have a mix of land uses and different housing types. The arrangement of land uses within neighborhoods shall allow residents to walk and bicycle to parks, schools, work, shopping, places of worship, transit stops, and other nearby neighborhoods. Neighborhoods should include a pedestrian-oriented neighborhood center – school, park, plaza, commercial area or other neighborhood facility – that gives each neighborhood a unique identity and a place for recreation or public gatherings.”(RLUTP, pg 2-32) Policy HN2.2 – Establish Interconnected Neighborhood Street and Sidewalk Patterns. “Neighborhood streets and sidewalks and/or walkways in both new and existing areas should form an interconnected network, including automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian routes within a neighborhood and between neighborhoods, in order to connect neighborhoods together and with other parts of the region. Neighborhoods should have frequently connected networks of walkways and bike paths, including connections to the Flagstaff Urban Trail System (FUTS), where practicable and feasible. In particular, direct walkway and bikeway route to schools, parks, and other community facilities should be provided. Equestrian facilities should be accommodated where appropriate.” (RLUTP, pg. 2-33) GOAL T3 (Transportation) “The region’s development pattern will support a diverse range of transportation choices, including transit, walking and bicycling, as well as driving.” (RLUTP, pg. 3-10) Policy OSPR1.3 – Provide Non-Motorized Transportation Corridors to Connect Communities, Neighborhoods, Open Spaces and Recreational Areas. “Provide non-motorized transportation corridors between neighborhoods, communities, and between the city and outlying areas and regional and national facilities and sites. Non-motorized access shall be provided from new and redevelopment neighborhoods and should be required from existing neighborhoods to regional open space via easements, trails, an on-street facilities with open space connections between FUTS and USFS trails. Existing neighborhoods are encouraged to improve non-motorized access and connections to regional open space and incorporate open space connections between FUTS and USFS trails.” (RLUTP, pg. 4-3) Policy NCR1.9 – Protect Dark Skies “Protection of dark skies and conservation of energy shall be undertaken by minimizing the detrimental effects to the region’s quality of life and astronomical observing conditions.” (RLUTP, pg. 6-5) Policy CFS1.1 – Determine and Require Adequate Public Facilities and Services. “The provision of adequate public facilities and services and the phasing of infrastructure improvements shall be important consideration in the timing and location of development.” (RLUTP, pg. 8-2) Policy CFS1.2 – Development shall pay its Fair Share Toward the Cost of Additional Public Service Needs Created by new Development, While Giving Consideration to the Rational Nexus Provisions to Show Direct Benefit. “The short- and long-term fiscal effects of land use and new development require the use of various tools, methodologies and programs to determine the cost of development and to ensure development is paying its fair share and that it has a direct relationship to benefits received by the development and burdens imposed on the provider.” (RLUTP, pg. 8-4) |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
None | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
The City Council may approve the ordinance as proposed, approve the ordinance with conditions, or deny the ordinance. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Applicant, Aspen Heights, is requesting a concept zoning-map amendment to rezone approximately 33.33 acres from the Rural Residential (RR) zone to the Medium Density Residential (MR) zone and approximately 3.60 acres from the Rural Residential (RR) zone to the Highway Commercial (HC) zone located at 2701 S. Woody Mountain Road. This amendment would allow the development of a multi-family style, student- housing development, operated as a rooming and boarding facility, consisting of 224 units (714 beds) located within single and duplex cottage structures on 33.33 acres and a commercial development consisting of approximately 20,000 square feet of street-level retail, general services and/or mixed-use development space adjacent to Route 66 on 3.60 acres. The subject property is currently undeveloped land with groupings of ponderosa pine trees left after the 2006 Woody Fire burned the site. The property gently slopes away from Woody Mountain Road with no significant slope resources. Land uses north of the subject property, across Route 66 include a mix of land under City and County jurisdiction. The McAllister Ranch property is located directly across Route 66 which is currently owned by the City of Flagstaff but primarily under Coconino County jurisdiction, along with the adjacent commercial property that contains the Professional River Outfitters operation. Land uses to the east of the subject property, across Woody Mountain Road, include the Woody Mountain Campground & RV Park both under the City and County jurisdictions on State Land and the Presidio in the Pines subdivision within the City. The land to the south and west of the subject property is undeveloped property referred to as the Westside 197 property that was recently auctioned. At this time, development plans for the Westside 197 are unknown. Just as a footnote, the math in the Ordinance and caption to the Ordinance regarding the size of the property appears to be off by .01 acres. We've chosen to stay consistent with the property descriptions provided by the surveyor, resulting in that small discrepancy due to rounding. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
An applicant requesting an amendment to the Zoning map may elect to pursue either a “Direct Ordinance with a Site Plan” or “Authorization to Rezone with a Concept Zoning Plan” per Section 10-20.50.040.D (pg. 20.50-5). The Direct Ordinance with a Site Plan process provides an applicant with a shorter approval process with fewer steps. In this approach the applicant submits fully developed site plans with all supporting information required for Site Plan Review concurrently with the Zoning Map amendment application. Once the Zoning Map amendment is approved by the Council, then the applicant can proceed directly to construction plan and building permit review. The Authorization to Rezone with a Concept Zoning Plan process allows the applicant to prepare a concept zoning plan and pursue site plan application after Council approves the Zoning Map Amendment. A Concept Zoning Plan should consist of a plan with proposed use(s), vicinity maps, context map, concept phasing, housing types if applicable and a proposed circulation map. This particular project initiated review of the Concept Plan prior to the adoption of the two-pronged Zoning map Amendment process. The zoning application, however, came in after the adoption of the changes to the Code discussed above and is a Concept Zoning Map Amendment. The applicant has chosen not to submit for Direct to Ordinance in conjunction with this application. However, this application contains more information than would normally be required for a Concept Zoning Map Amendment, thus this application is a hybrid of the old process and the new concept zoning plan application. The applicant is requesting a Zoning Map Amendment for a multi-family style, student housing development, operated as a Rooming and Boarding Facility, consisting of 224 units (714 beds) located within single and duplex cottage structures known as “Aspen Heights.” A commercial development consisting of approximately 20,000 square feet of street-level retail, general services and/or mixed-use development space adjacent to Route 66 is also included in this request. Concept plans of the development, copies of which are attached to this report, show the residential units lining the exterior boundaries of the property, with internal driveways lined with parking, and recreation facilities centrally located within the development. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and consideration related to this request are addressed in more detail in the attached Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report, dated September 12, 2014. The existing City of Flagstaff boundary bisects the current parcel limiting the development of the site. The majority of the existing parcel is located within the City of Flagstaff boundaries and the annexation will result in an expansion of the City limits to allow for appropriate development of the subject site. The proposed development will require a proportional-share contribution to a future traffic signal at the intersection of Route 66 and S. Woody Mountain road per the results of the accepted traffic impact analysis. In addition, approximately 5500 linear feet of sere line will need to be upgraded in conjunction with the proposed development. The Applicant has indicated their desire to participate in the recapture program. The proposed development plans to off-set recreation impacts associated with the project by providing substantial recreation improvement on site in compliance with the City of Flagstaff Zoning Code. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform/Consult The Applicant held a neighborhood meeting on Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 5:30 pm. The Applicant received two phone calls from their meeting notice requesting information about the project. Seven people attended the meeting and had questions in regards to the case. None of the attendees expressed opposition to the Annexation or the Zoning Map Amendment. Staff has not received any other comments in regards to either the annexation or the Zoning Map Amendment. Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council are conducted in conjunction with any request for Zoning Map Amendment. In accordance with Arizona Revised Statute, notice of the public hearing was provided by placing an ad in the Daily Sun, posting a notice on the property, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. As of this writing, staff has received two email letters, copies of which are attached to this report, wanting to make sure that the planning for the site takes into account the use of Woody Mountain Road by a large number of W.L. Gore employees who commute to the facilities in the area and expressing concern about the increased lighting impacts from higher density development within Lighting Zone I. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on September 24, 2014 at 4 p.m. Three individuals spoke in regards to this case. Two addressed concerns in regards to dark sky related issues and the impacts of outdoor lighting. On individual asked for additional information in regards to the provision of affordable housing. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Attachments: | P&Z Commission Staff Report | ||||
P&Z Commission Draft Minutes | |||||
Application & Narrative | |||||
Site Analysis | |||||
Zoning Map | |||||
RLUTP Land Use Map | |||||
FRP 2030 Goals & Policies | |||||
TIA acceptance memo | |||||
Public Hearing Advertisments | |||||
Citizen Participation Plan & Report | |||||
Citizen Comment Email Letters | |||||
Concept Plans | |||||
Ordinance 2014-31 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
14.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-35 and Ordinance No. 2014-27: Public hearing to consider proposed amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), specifically Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), and related amendments to Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions), and Chapter 10-90 (Maps); consideration of Resolution No. 2014-35 declaring the proposed amendments as a public record; and adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-27, adopting amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), specifically Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions), and Chapter 10-90 (Maps), by reference. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the Council Meeting of October 21, 2014 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The Council held three work sessions in 2014 to discuss the need for, and provide direction on, possible amendments to the Sign Standards (Division 10-50.100) of the Flagstaff Zoning Code. These amendments are now presented to the Council for review and adoption. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
Council's possible adoption of the proposed amendments to the Sign Standards will not have a financial or budgetary impact on the Comprehensive Planning and Code Administration Program's budget. Later this year a proposal to amend the City's fee schedule will be presented to the Council for review and possible adoption. Proposed amendments to the fee schedule will establish a sliding fee for sign permits based on the area and complexity of the sign, rather than the flat fee charged now regardless of sign area and the time required for the permit's review. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 11. Effective governance REGIONAL PLAN: Goal CC.1. Reflect and respect the region’s natural setting and dramatic views in the built environment.
The proposed amendments support this goal by ensuring the aesthetic beauty of the City’s natural and built environment is protected (Purpose statement B.5).
Policy ED.7.1. Support planning, design, and development that positively, creatively, and flexibly contribute to the community image.”
The proposed amendments to the sign standards streamline, simplify, and improve the standards to provide flexibility and maintain a positive community image, while supporting the needs of business owners.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The Council has held three work sessions to provide direction to staff on proposed amendments to the Sign Standards - April 11th, May 12th, and July 8th. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Please refer to the Expanded Options and Alternatives below. | |||||
Background/History: | |||||
Since the adoption on November 1, 2011 of the Flagstaff Zoning Code by the City Council, planning staff, as well as staff that work with the Zoning Code on a regular basis (i.e. from the engineering, traffic, stormwater, housing, or legal sections/divisions), have documented sections of the Code where possible amendments would be required. Ideas for amendments submitted by Flagstaff residents have also been received and are being compiled with staff’s suggested revisions into a comprehensive document of suggested revisions to the Code. In a work session on April 11, 2014 the Council prioritized amendments to Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) over other needed changes to the Zoning Code. All other proposed amendments to the Zoning Code will be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council later this year or in early 2015. At a subsequent work session held on May 12, 2014 the Council provided specific suggestions and direction on where amendments were needed. Ultimately in a work session on July 8, 2014 the Council confirmed that draft amendments prepared by staff were consistent with their direction, and requested that the final amendments were to be presented for review and adoption as soon as possible. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The amendments proposed to the City’s sign standards attached to Resolution No. 2014-35 are based on direction from the Council at their last work session on July 8, 2014. A report describing the proposed amendments as recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission is attached. This report provides a detailed overview of the more significant amendments warranting further explanation. Note that staff has included two options for a proposed amendment in Section 10-20.40.130 (Sign Permits - Temporary Signs) relative to whether a property owner or property manager should apply for a Temporary Sign Permit or alternatively whether a business owner may apply for this permit. Attached to the report is a Track Changes version of most of the draft amendments that shows the majority of new text in underline and text to be deleted in Also attached to this report is a table that summarizes the more significant changes to Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) based on whether a proposed change is more restrictive or less restrictive, or if it is proposed for deletion. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The sign standards incorporated within the City's former Land Development Code generally worked reasonably well, although they were poorly written. At the time of the rewrite of the Land Development Code prior to adoption of the current Zoning Code adopted in November 2011, the sign standards were reformatted (e.g. paragraphs of text were consolidated into tables) but the standards themselves were not significantly changed, except with regard to building mounted signs where new placement standards were included, and temporary signs. Staff, business owners, Flagstaff residents, and members of the Council soon realized that the sign standards were not effective as they could be, and they still presented issues by being complex in certain areas, hard to read and understand, and prone to inconsistency in interpretation. The proposed amendments to the Sign Standards attempt to resolve these problems. Standards have been simplified, and unnecessary or duplicative standards have been removed (e.g. Building Mounted Signs). New standards to allow sign types not previously allowed in the current code have been included (e.g. Interpretative Signs). Further the standards have been reformatted so they are more logically organized, text has been simplified, tables have been consolidated, improved illustrations will be inserted, and a document that will be easier to read, interpret, and apply will result. The amendments to the Sign Standards are, therefore, a benefit to the community as they provide for and support the needs of business owners by establishing simpler, clearer, and more understandable standards that will allow them greater opportunities for advertising and promoting their businesses. Consistent with the Flagstaff Regional Plan though, the proposed amendments will also ensure that the aesthetic beauty of the City's natural and built environment is protected. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
INFORM, CONSULT, and INVOLVE In a work session on April 11, 2014, the Council directed staff to complete amendments to Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) of the Zoning Code as a priority over other amendments to the Zoning Code. In two subsequent work sessions (May 12th and July 8th), Council confirmed that draft amendments prepared by staff were consistent with their direction, and requested that the final amendments were to be presented for review and adoption as soon as possible. Some members of the public participated in these work sessions and provided comment to the Council when invited to do so. Staff has invited representatives from local sign companies to be involved in the development of the proposed amendments, some of whom participated in meetings with staff at City Hall. The proposed amendments were also presented to such local organizations as Friends of Flagstaff’s Future, Northern Arizona Builders Association, Northern Arizona Association of Realtors, and the Flagstaff Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee. Staff was also interviewed by KAFF radio on the proposed sign amendments on two occasions before and after the Planning and Zoning Commission's public meeting and public hearing. A ¼ page display advertisement was printed in the August 8th and 10th Arizona Daily Sun in advance of an open public meeting at City Hall on August 11th as well as the August 13th Planning and Zoning Commission work session. The open public meeting at City Hall on August 11th was attended by five City residents who provided useful ideas on the proposed amendments, some of which were included in the amendments later presented to the Commission on August 27th. At the August 13th Planning and Zoning Commission work session three citizens addressed the Commission and provided their perspective on the proposed amendments to the Flagstaff Zoning Code. The commissioners also provided their own opinions on the proposed amendments. As a result of these suggestions, further refinements were made and presented to the Commission on August 27th. A legal notice was printed in the August 12, 2014 Arizona Daily Sun at least 15 days in advance of the Planning and Zoning Commission’s August 27th public hearing as required by the Zoning Code. Three members of the public addressed the Planning and Zoning Commission at their August 27th public hearing. Following the public comment period and some discussion, the Commission moved to recommend approval of the proposed amendments to the Sign Standards subject to three amendments as listed below:
The City Council's October 21st public hearing was advertised with a legal notice in the Arizona Daily Sun on October 3rd. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Attachments: | Res | ||||
Ord. 2014-27 | |||||
Staff Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
15.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of a Preliminary Plat request from Mogollon Engineering & Surveying, Inc., on behalf of Pinnacle 146 LLC, for a subdivision of approximately 18.59 acres into 106 single-family residential townhouse lots located at 800 E Sterling Lane within the Medium Density Residential (MR) zone. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council approved the Preliminary Plat subject to one condition. |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
The City Council shall find, based on a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, that the proposed Preliminary Plat meets the requirement of the Zoning Code (City Code Title 10), the Subdivision Code (City Code Title 11), and the Engineering Design Standards and Specifications for New Infrastructure (City Code Title 13). | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
No financial liabilities are anticipated by the approval of this Preliminary Plat. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal: | |||||
Retain, expand, and diversify economic base Effective governance |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
In August of 1998, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 1976 that conditionally rezoned the site from Rural Residential (RR) to Medium Residential (MR) for the development of an affordable residential townhouse project consisting of 548 units called Zuni Heights. Concurrently, the Growth Management Guide 2000 land use designation for the site was amended from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential in order to support the increase in density. Subsequent to the approval of Growth Management Guide amendment and rezoning, platting was not pursued and the site was never developed. On March 7, 2005, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2005-15 approving a Development Agreement between the City and developer, Resolution No. 2005-16 that amended the Flagstaff Area Regional Land Use and Transportation Plan land use designation for the site from High Density Residential to Medium Density Residential in order to support a reduced density, Ordinance No. 2005-05 that modified the conditions of Ordinance No. 1976 for the development of a single-family residential townhouse project consisting of 206 units called Pinnacle Pines, and a tentative plat for Unit 1 of the subdivision. |
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
Pinnacle 146, LLC (the “Owner”) is the property owner of record of approximately 18.59 acres located at 800 E Sterling Lane within the Pinnacle Pines townhouse subdivision (the “Subject Property”). The proposed preliminary plat subdivides the Subject Property into 106 single-family residential townhouse lots. This is the second phase of the Pinnacle Pines townhouse subdivision. The first phase, Unit 1, is nearing build-out with 102 single-family residential townhouse lots on approximately 22 acres. The Pinnacle Pines Unit 1 Final Plat, a copy of which is attached, created 102 single-family residential townhouse lots and identified the area that is currently intended for development of Unit 2 as Tract 15 with a note that it was to be retained by the owner/developer for future development. As part of the Development Agreement associated with the rezoning, it was agreed that secondary access to the site shall be provided through a “Southerly Access” to John Wesley Powell Boulevard prior to or concurrent with the platting and construction of the 103rd residential lot. The “Southerly Access” was proposed in one of two locations. The first, and most preferred, option was through the Forest Service land to the south as part of a land trade to create a Regional Park. Unfortunately, the land trade was never completed and the Regional Park designation on the land has since been removed. The second option was through Tract 7 at the southwest corner of Unit 1. While not explicitly depicted on the final plat as a potential location for the “Southerly Access,” it was noted that a private roadway easement was reserved across Tract 7. Civil Improvement Plans for the construction of the “Southerly Access” have been submitted to the City and are currently under review. Approval of the Civil Improvement Plans and commencement of construction must occur prior to or concurrent with the final platting of Phase 1 of Unit 2. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform. The existing zoning of the Subject Property allows for the proposed subdivision. No public hearings or public outreach are required by either the Zoning Code or the Subdivision Code as part of a preliminary plat review process. As of this writing, staff has received 7 e-mails, copies of which are attached, primarily expressing concerns over the location of the secondary access through Tract 7 of Unit 1. It is the understanding of staff that the Owner has reached out to the residents of Unit 1 through the Homeowners Association to discuss the project and the need for the secondary access. | |||||
Attachments: | PZC Staff Report | ||||
Application | |||||
Unit 1 Final Plat | |||||
Draft Dev. Agmt. | |||||
Secondary Access Easement | |||||
Concept Elevations | |||||
Public Comment | |||||
Preliminary Plat | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||
|
15.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-37: A resolution of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, Coconino County, Arizona, repealing Resolution No. 2013-01 which adopted the Board and Commission Members' Handbook, and adopting the 2014 Board and Commission Members' Rules and Operations Manual | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2014-37 by tittle only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2014-37 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2014-37 |
|||||
Policy Decision or Reason for Action: | |||||
Adoption of this resolution will make changes to the Board and Commission Members' Handbook as discussed recently by the City Council to address issues such as consistency of membership numbers and term length. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
No impact | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS:
8. Review all Commissions |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The City Council identified the review of all Boards/Commissions as one of its top ten goals at its retreat last year. Since that time, several work sessions have been held to address changes they would like made to both the Manual (Handbook) and necessary ordinances to amend the City Code to reflect those changes. The first step in this process is adoption of this amended Manual. The necessary ordinances will be presented for further discussion and first read at the City Council meeting of November 3, 2014. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Adopt the resolution 2) Amend the resolution by making further changes to the Manual 3) Not adopt the resolution |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
Since the City Council first identified the review of all Boards/Commissions as one of its goals last year, several work sessions have been held to discussion changes they would like to see made in the overall process and to provide consistency among the various boards/commissions. These changes include:
The ordinances required to make the above changes will be brought before Council at its November 3, 2014, Council Meeting for consideration. The Manual is being brought forward at this time to allow for its adoption prior to Board/Commission Member training scheduled for later this month. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | Res. 2014-37 | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Form Review | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|