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 Grant Application and Acceptance upon Award: Arizona Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) Federal Fiscal Year 2016 for Police Department Applications for DUI Task Force, Youth Alcohol Prevention and Interdiction, Radar Units, Patrol Bicycles and Message Sign Board Grants. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the application(s) and acceptance of an award to the Arizona Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) for grant funds for the Police Department in the amount of $45,240 for DUI Task Force activities, $44,160 for Youth Alcohol Prevention and Interdiction task force, $11,459.34 for Handheld Radars, $8,635.46 for Patrol Bicycles, and $20,793.60 for Message Sign Board.
|
||||||||||
10. | ROUTINE ITEMS | |||||||||
A. | Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-10: A resolution of the Mayor and Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona approving the City of Flagstaff Housing Authority's 5-Year Plan and authorizing submission to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Resolution 2015-10 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution 2015-10 by title only (if approved above)
3) Adopt Resolution No. 2015-10 |
||||||||||
B. |
Consideration and Acceptance of Proposal and Contracts and Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-13: Community Banking Program Services (Approve contracts with Alliance Bank and adopt Resolution authorizing agents for financial transactions) |
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
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. 2015-03: Public hearing to consider proposed amendments to the Flagstaff City Code to add freight and trucking facility as a permitted use in the Research and Development (RD) zone. Specifically, Title 10, Zoning Code, Division 10-40.30 (Non-Transect Zones), Section 10-40.30.050 (Industrial Uses) and related amendments to Division 10-80.20 (Definition of Specialized Terms, Phrases, and Building Functions), specifically Sections 10-80.20.060 (Definitions, "F.") and 10-80.20.200 (Definitions, "T.") and first reading of Ordinance No. 2015-03. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
At the Council Meeting of April 7, 2015
1) Hold public hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2015-03 for the first time by title only 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2015-03 for the first time by title only. At the Council Meeting of May 5, 2015 4) Read Ordinance No. 2015-03 for the final time by title only 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2015-03 by title only (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2015-03. |
||||||
B. |
Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Annexation Ordinance No. 2015-02: An annexation ordinance extending and increasing the corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff by annexing land totaling approximately 135.91 acres located at 4100 & 4250 Kiltie Lane, establishing city zoning as RD (Research and Development) for 125.91 acres and HC (Highway Commercial) for 10 acres including right-of-way for Flagstaff Ranch Road and Kiltie Lane. (Annexation of property for W.L. Gore located on Kiltie Lane) |
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
At the April 7, 2015 Council Meeting 1) Hold Public Hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2015-02 by title only for the first time 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2015-02 by title only for the first time (if approved above) At the May 5, 2015 Council Meeting 4) Read Ordinance No. 2015-02 by title for the final time 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2015-02 by title for the final time (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2015-02 |
||||||
15. | REGULAR AGENDA | |||||
A. | Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-02: A resolution of the Mayor and Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona adopting the Community Reinvestment Plan (Community Reinvestment Plan) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2015-02 by title only
2) Clerk reads Resolution No. 2015-02 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2015-02 |
||||||
B. | Consideration and Approval of Grant Application: Arizona State Parks FY 2015 Recreational Trails Program Grant for Picture Canyon. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Approve the grant application to Arizona State Parks FY 2015 Recreational Trails Program for a total estimated project cost of $128,506 ($74,446 grant/ $54,060 match).
|
||||||
C. | Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-12: A resolution of the Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona declaring for purposes of Section 1.150-2 of the Federal Treasury Regulations, official intent to be reimbursed in connection with certain capital expenditures relating to the Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative. (Reimbursement resolution for the Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative). | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2015-12 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2015-12 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No.2015-12 |
||||||
D. | Consideration of Election Dates for Future Municipal Elections | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||
Direct staff to prepare a ballot question to the voters at the November 2015 Special Election for Charter amendments to hold municipal elections in the fall of even-numbered years on dates consistent with state law.
|
||||||
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 Grant Application and Acceptance upon Award: Arizona Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) Federal Fiscal Year 2016 for Police Department Applications for DUI Task Force, Youth Alcohol Prevention and Interdiction, Radar Units, Patrol Bicycles and Message Sign Board Grants. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the application(s) and acceptance of an award to the Arizona Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) for grant funds for the Police Department in the amount of $45,240 for DUI Task Force activities, $44,160 for Youth Alcohol Prevention and Interdiction task force, $11,459.34 for Handheld Radars, $8,635.46 for Patrol Bicycles, and $20,793.60 for Message Sign Board.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
This Staff Summary seeks approval and acceptance of the grant applications to GOHS for the Flagstaff Police Departments. We are seeking grant funds in the amount of $45,240.00 for the DUI Task Force, $44,160.00 for Youth Alcohol and Prevention and Interdiction, $11,459.34 for 10 Radar units, $8,635.46 for 4 patrol bicycles and $20,793.60 for a message sign board. Without monies allocated by the FY 2016 grant to the Flagstaff Police Department, monies needed to pay scheduled overtime for activities to prevent and control crime may not be available in the City's annual budget. There is no match requirement for this grant. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no significant financial impact to the Flagstaff Police Department in terms of expenditures. The expenditures will be budgeted in FY 2016 in 001-04-062-6069 with 100% offset in grant revenue. |
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Effective governance | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Yes, Council has accepted prior-year funded GOHS grants for the Police Department.
|
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Flagstaff Police Department considers any loss of life or limb to a drug or alcohol-related, motor vehicle accident unacceptable. We have conducted both in-service and advanced officer training in D.U.I. detection. We have a longstanding tradition of aggressive D.U.I. interdiction and enforcement. Every officer in our organization is held accountable to D.U.I. arrest standards. This is done in the interest of protecting life and property through collision reduction. Our interdiction efforts have further been supported with D.U.I. overtime operations such as task force patrols, and directed patrols on weekends and holidays. These efforts are staffed by officers on overtime to enhance effectiveness. Without the financial resources provided for by DUI Task Force grant application, it is difficult, if not impossible, to staff these operations with on-duty officers as they have primary responsibility to respond to all manner of calls for service during their shift. The Youth Alcohol Prevention and Interdiction grant application fits in with our mission to protect and preserve life and property. The Flagstaff Police Department has a zero tolerance policy towards alcohol-related crimes including: driving under the influence, minor consumption, misrepresentation of age to purchase alcohol, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Related to these ends, the FPD expects each of its patrol officers to proactively engage in the arrest of liquor violations. Flagstaff Police Department officers are typically attached to patrol squads that work during the evening and night time hours. During their shift, these officers are responsible for answering calls for service while remaining vigilant for alcohol violations. However, we feel that we have the potential to be even more effective and have a greater impact in the area of underage drinking enforcement during known times and locations when these types of violations are more likely to occur. Our proposal concerns the granting of overtime reimbursement funds for directed patrol efforts for the enforcement of underage drinking laws, as well as an educational component. The Flagstaff Police Departments grant application for the purchase of 10 radars will assist our officers in achieving our mission of keeping our streets safe. Studies of accident causes within the city of Flagstaff have historically shown speed not reasonable and prudent as the most frequent causal factor of collisions. Increased enforcement of speed statutes benefits the public by directly addressing the primary cause of accidents within our community. The most efficient way to enforce these statutes is through the implementation of a radar enforcement program. These radar units will directly assist the officers in lowering the number of speed related accidents. This in turn would result in better protection of life as well as a reduction of injuries and property damage from speed related collisions. The consideration for grant assistance in the purchase of 4 patrol bicycles and related equipment would greatly increase our effectiveness in patrolling difficult areas of Flagstaff. These bicycles would be used regularly by officers addressing pedestrian and bicycle violations occurring within the downtown and south side areas of Flagstaff. The city has a vibrant downtown area frequented often by a large pedestrian and bicycle population. This area presents unique traffic enforcement challenges due to the congested nature of the downtown area. This congestion is due to the historic layout of streets, the frequency of one way only streets, as well as having Northern Arizona University located immediately south of the historic downtown area. Because of the volume of foot and bicycle use of the roadways in this area, traffic violations are not uncommon. Last year there were 80 accidents involving bicyclists. The most efficient way to enforce traffic statutes pertaining to pedestrians and bicyclists is through the implementation of a bicycle patrol program. Having police officers enforce traffic regulations on bicycle gives the officer the ability to negotiate the congested downtown area and make contact with violators for educational and enforcement purposes. This education and enforcement will result in better protection life as well as a reduction of injuries through a reduction of collisions. Lastly, the Flagstaff Police Department is requesting grant assistance for the purchase of a message sign board. We are requesting a portable message signboard to serve as a vital tool in our comprehensive road safety program. Portable message signboards are an important tool to provide traffic information to motorists. These signs advise motorists of traffic incidents or construction ahead so they can consider alternate routes. Having the ability to provide real-time information about incidents, traffic, roadwork, and weather or pavement conditions is beneficial for all motorists and could aid in driver safety and traffic flow. This in turn would result in better protection life as well as a reduction of injuries and property damage from collisions. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The law-abiding citizens of our community expect and deserve our streets and neighborhoods to be places where they feel safe. The approval of these grant applications allow us to seek additional resources to help us reduce collisions by removing impaired drivers, conducting underage alcohol prevention/education, reducing speed related collisions with the use of radar enforcement, educating and enforcing bicycle laws and warning traveling motorists with appropriate signage. The numerous letters and comments the Police Department receives from citizens reinforce this goal. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The Police Department grant applications will assist the Flagstaff Police Department to prevent and control crime, administer justice, and assist crime victims. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | 2016 GOHS DUI Grant | ||||
2016 GOHS Youth Alcohol | |||||
2016 GOHS Radars | |||||
2016 GOHS Bicycle Grant | |||||
2016 GOHS Message Board Grant | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.A.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-10: A resolution of the Mayor and Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona approving the City of Flagstaff Housing Authority's 5-Year Plan and authorizing submission to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Resolution 2015-10 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution 2015-10 by title only (if approved above)
3) Adopt Resolution No. 2015-10 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires a 5-year plan to be developed and submitted for approval. This planning requirement, critical to the direction of the City of Flagstaff Housing Authority, requires a mission statement and a set of goals and objectives. The 2015-2020 plan contains the mission statement adopted in 2000 and 8 goals and objectives prepared for the 5-Year Plan period beginning July 1, 2015. Adoption of Resolution 2015-10 will provide approval of the City of Flagstaff Housing Authority's (CFHA) 5-Year Plan and authorize submission of the Plan to HUD for the period July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2020. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
Each year HUD provides Capital Funds to be used for operations, management improvements, administration, physical improvements to public housing units and grounds, and the purchase of maintenance equipment. Funding provided by HUD for Fiscal Year 2015 is $357,680.00 to be used for upgrading deteriorated waterlines at Brannen Homes; replace/paint siding at Siler Homes; mandatory ADA improvements to the Siler Homes office; repair/replace parking lots at the Dortha, Main, and Lockett scattered sites. There is no impact on the City's general fund. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 3) Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics 4) Explore and adopt policies to lower the costs associated with housing to the end user 10) Decrease the number of working poor REGIONAL PLAN: Goal NH.1. Foster and maintain healthy and diverse urban, suburban, and rural neighborhoods in the Flagstaff region. Goal NH.3. Make available a variety of housing types at different price points, to provide housing opportunity for all economic sectors. Goal NH.4. All housing is safe and sanitary. |
|||||
Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
While there has not been a previous Council action on this 5-year plan, Council approves the subsequent Annual Plan update required each year by HUD. Council approved the 2014-2015 Annual Plan update on April 1, 2014. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve the CFHA 5-Year Plan 2) Amend and Approve the CFHA 5-Year Plan 3) Do not approve the CFHA 5-Year Plan |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998 (QHWRA) requires the submission of a 5-Year Plan to HUD. The Plan includes goals and objectives; financial resources for management of Public Housing and Section 8 Housing programs; assurances that policies are current in accordance with HUD regulations; a housing needs survey and a strategy on how to address the needs. This is the fourth 5-year plan to be prepared by CFHA in accordance with Federal requirements. The Siler Resident Management Corporation, an Arizona non-profit whose membership is all of the public housing residents, provided input on the development of the 5-Year Plan, capital improvements, and additional needs. The 5-Year Plan needs to be approved by the City Council and submitted to HUD by no later that April 17, 2015. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Section 5.2 of the 5-Year Plan identifies quantifiable goals and objectives that will enable the Public Housing Authority to serve the needs of low-income, very low-income, and extremely low-income households. Eight goals and objectives for the next five years have been prepared by the CFHA and City Housing staff. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Without an approved 5-year plan, the federal funding for the programs operated by CFHA will be jeopardized. There are no General Fund monies involved in the Plan. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act (QHWRA) was enacted by Congress to improve the living environment of Public Housing Residents. The Capital Fund Program is used to improve the Public Housing units for comfort, safety, and energy efficiency. CFHA operates 265 low-income public housing units; manages 333 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers; 38 Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Vouchers; 12 SRO Section 8 vouchers for the seriously mentally ill; and manages an 80 unit Section 8 New Construction development (Clark Homes) all for the benefit of low-income households in Flagstaff. More than 725 households a year are housed through CFHA programs and efforts. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform The Public Housing Residents are kept informed of unit improvements through the Siler Resident Management Corporation (SRMC); monthly housing authority newsletters; and resident meetings. The QHWRA requires resident participation through a Resident Advisory Board (RAB). Since the SRMC represents all of the Pubic Housing Residents, they are considered the RAB and provide necessary input. The City of Flagstaff Housing Authority Board of Commissioners considered the 5-year plan at its March 23, 2015 meeting and approved the plan unanimously. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Attachments: | Resolution 2015-10 | ||||
5-Year CFHA Plan | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.B.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Acceptance of Proposal and Contracts and Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-13: Community Banking Program Services (Approve contracts with Alliance Bank and adopt Resolution authorizing agents for financial transactions) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
Per Council direction, staff was asked to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Community Banking Services for purchases of investments through the Certificate of Deposit Registry Services (CDARS) program for an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 and for a term not to exceed three (3) years. The goal of the RFP process, with direction from Council, was to solicit proposals from lending institutions that met the following criteria.
The RFP process resulted in the proposal now under consideration by Council. The proposal contains investments allowed by the City's investment policy that maintain the City's goals of safety, liquidity and yield.
|
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no direct financial impact for the City. The City is allowed under its investment policy to invest in the proposed securities and the projected returns of the proposed investments are in line with other investments the City may invest in. In addition, the City will invest the $5,000,000 dollars under a "laddering" strategy. This will allow the City to reinvest funds at higher interest rates if interest rates rise over the short term. |
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Effective governance.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Yes. Barbara Goodrich provided a City Council Report (CCR) to City Council in September 2013. Ms. Goodrich also presented more information to City Council at a City Council work session in March 2014. Another presentation to City Council was giving by Andy Wagemaker at the September 30, 2014 City Council work session. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Accept the Proposal and approve the agreement with Alliance Bank of Arizona for a community banking program. 2) Reject the proposal and do not approve the agreement with Alliance Bank of Arizona for a community banking program. The designated funds will be invested in other investments approved in the City's investment policy. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The City of Flagstaff Revenue Section is responsible for the safekeeping and investment of all public monies and has created an investment policy that provides for the prudent and efficient investment of the City’s temporarily idle cash while safely maximizing returns within carefully defined investment parameters. The objectives of the City’s Investment Policy, in order of priority, are safety, liquidity, and yield. Within these objectives, the Revenue Section is continuously evaluating investment opportunities to maximize the return on City monies. The City of Flagstaff Mayor and Council are committed to a community bank deposit program. The Council endorsed a community bank deposit program whereby a maximum of $5 million dollars will be deposited into a Certificate of Deposit Registry Service (“CDARS”) at “local” financial institutions where the City’s deposit would be totally insured by FDIC insurance, fully collateralized with U.S. Government Obligations, or fully covered by a combination of FDIC insurance or the aforementioned collateral. Barbara Goodrich provided a City Council Report (CCR) to City Council in September 2013. Ms. Goodrich also presented more information to City Council at a City Council work session in March 2014. Another presentation to City Council was giving by Andy Wagemaker at the September 30, 2014 City Council work session. At this last work session, City Council gave the direction to proceed with the RFP and this proposal is the culmination of all those efforts. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Through the RFP process the City received one (1) proposal response from Alliance Bank of Arizona. With only one (1) proposal response submitted, a small group of City staff reviewed the proposal to ensure that the City's requirements were met and to ensure the intent of the solicitation was met. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | CDARS Placement Agreement | ||||
CDARS Placement Agreement Supplement | |||||
Custodial Agreement | |||||
Custodial Agreement Amendment | |||||
Banking Resolution | |||||
Signature Form | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2015-03: Public hearing to consider proposed amendments to the Flagstaff City Code to add freight and trucking facility as a permitted use in the Research and Development (RD) zone. Specifically, Title 10, Zoning Code, Division 10-40.30 (Non-Transect Zones), Section 10-40.30.050 (Industrial Uses) and related amendments to Division 10-80.20 (Definition of Specialized Terms, Phrases, and Building Functions), specifically Sections 10-80.20.060 (Definitions, "F.") and 10-80.20.200 (Definitions, "T.") and first reading of Ordinance No. 2015-03. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
At the Council Meeting of April 7, 2015
1) Hold public hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2015-03 for the first time by title only 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2015-03 for the first time by title only. At the Council Meeting of May 5, 2015 4) Read Ordinance No. 2015-03 for the final time by title only 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2015-03 by title only (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2015-03. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Executive Summary: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
When rewriting and updating the former Land Development Code (LDC) as the new Zoning Code adopted on November 1, 2011, the former Euclidian or conventional use-based zones were combined with the performance-based zones established with the 1991 adoption of the LDC to create the new zoning districts now in effect. In the Research and Development (RD) Zone, the freight and trucking land use category was inadvertently omitted. The proposed text amendments described in this staff summary and detailed in Ordinance 2015-03 seek to remedy this error by re-instating the freight and trucking facility land use. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Financial Impact: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
None
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
COUNCIL GOALS: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please refer to the Expanded Options and Alternatives below. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Background/History: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In late January 2015, staff and a business owner who owns a developed parcel near the Flagstaff Pulliam Airport held a pre-application meeting to discuss a proposal for the expansion of the existing use, a freight and trucking facility. While preparing for this meeting, staff realized that there was an error in the Zoning Code with regard to the uses allowed in the Research and Development (RD) Zone. As part of the rewrite and update of the former Land Development Code (LDC) as the new Zoning Code adopted on November 1, 2011, the former Euclidian or conventional use-based zones were combined with the performance-based zones established with the 1991 adoption of the LDC. In this case the following zones were combined to create the Research and Development (RD) Zone in the Zoning Code:
Prior to the adoption of the new Zoning Code, on July 22, 2008 a freight and trucking company applied for and received Site Plan Review approval for a new 14,600 sq. ft. warehouse building on a property located near the Flagstaff Pulliam Airport. At the time of approval and establishment of this new business the property was zoned Business Park Intermediate (BPI). This business has been successful, and now desires to expand the existing building by an additional 4,370 sq. ft. However, upon reviewing the Zoning Code staff determined that the use could not be expanded because the original use as allowed in the LDC (transportation or trucking yards) was no longer permitted in the Research and Development (RD) Zone. This meant that the present use is nonconforming, and consistent with Section 10-20.60.030 (Restrictions on Nonconforming Uses and Structures), specifically Subsection A.2, nonconforming uses may not be expanded. The business owner was dismayed to hear this news, yet following staff’s suggestion, prepared to proceed with a zone change application to rezone the property to a zoning designation that would allow for the continued use of the property as a freight or trucking facility. After some consideration, staff agreed that it made the most sense to amend the Zoning Code to accommodate the continued use of the property as a freight or trucking facility consistent with its current use, rather than to guide the applicant through a zone change. After all, freight and trucking uses were permitted in the BPI Zone prior to the adoption of the 2011 Zoning Code, and the proposed amendment essentially is putting back an allowed use that was inadvertently removed when the former zones in the LDC were combined. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Key Considerations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The following amendments are, therefore, proposed (new text is shown in underline, and text proposed to be deleted is shown as Chapter 10-40 Specific to Zones Division 10-40.30 Non-Transect Zones Section 10-40.30.050 Industrial Zones Table 10-40.30.050.B (Allowed Uses) lists the allowed uses by category for all the Industrial Zones. A copy of Page 40.30-22 from the Zoning Code is attached that shows the context of these amendments in Table 10-40.30.050.B. On Page 40.30-22 under the category “Industrial, Manufacturing, Processing & Wholesaling” uses, amend the “Transportation or Trucking Yards” row and insert a new row, “Freight or Trucking Facility”:
Explanations:
Division 10-80.20 Definition of Specialized Terms, Phrases, and Building Functions Section 10-80.20.060 Definitions, “F.” Insert a new definition as follows: Freight or Trucking Facility: A facility for the receipt, transfer, short-term storage, and dispatch of goods transported by truck. Includes express and other mail and package distribution facilities.
Explanation:
This new definition clearly defines a freight or trucking facility as a distinct use that is different to a transportation yard (see below). It contemplates such uses as the US Postal Service or freight and delivery companies such as UPS, FedEx, or other similar companies.
Section 10-80.20.200 Definitions, “T.” Amend the definition as follows: Transportation
Explanation:
“Trucking” has been deleted to make a clearer distinction between a transportation yard used for the servicing and storage of large trucks and semi-trailers and a freight or trucking facility as defined above. Insert a new definition as follows to provide a cross-reference: Trucking Facility: See “Freight or Trucking Facility”. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
None. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The amendments to the Zoning Code included in Ordinance 2015-03 resolve an error in the current Code by putting back a use (freight or trucking facility) that was erroneously omitted when the Zoning Code was adopted in 2011. This is not only beneficial to the business owner who brought this omission to the City's attention, but it is also beneficial to other property owners within the Research and Development (RD) Zone. Furthermore, by establishing a 1/4 mile buffer from established residential uses, any possible impacts from a freight or trucking facility are mitigated consistent with similar buffer standards already in place in the Zoning Code. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Involvement: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Inform and Involve As required by Arizona law and the Zoning Code, an 1/8 page display advertisement was published in the February 24, 2015 issue of the Arizona Daily Sun in advance of the Planning and Zoning Commission’s March 11th public hearing. The Commission’s work session on February 25th was also noticed in compliance with applicable law. A similar notice was used to advertise the City Council's public hearing. All property owners whose properties are in the Research and Development (RD) Zone were notified by first class mail of the Planning and Zoning Commission’s public hearing. Notice was also provided to those citizens whose names are listed on the Registry of Persons and Groups who requested to be informed of all upcoming public meetings and hearings. At the February 25th Planning and Zoning Commission work session no citizens addressed the Commission on these proposed amendments. However, the commissioners discussed the proposed amendments, asked questions of staff, and offered clarifying suggestions, which have been included into the proposed amendments. On March 11, 2015 the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments. No members of the public spoke at this hearing. The Commission unanimously moved to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed amendments as described in Ordinance 2015-03. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Attachments: | Page 40.30-22, Table 10-40.30.050 | ||||
Ord. No. 2015-03 | |||||
RD Zone Quarter-Mile Buffer Map | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Annexation Ordinance No. 2015-02: An annexation ordinance extending and increasing the corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff by annexing land totaling approximately 135.91 acres located at 4100 & 4250 Kiltie Lane, establishing city zoning as RD (Research and Development) for 125.91 acres and HC (Highway Commercial) for 10 acres including right-of-way for Flagstaff Ranch Road and Kiltie Lane. (Annexation of property for W.L. Gore located on Kiltie Lane) |
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
At the April 7, 2015 Council Meeting 1) Hold Public Hearing 2) Read Ordinance No. 2015-02 by title only for the first time 3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2015-02 by title only for the first time (if approved above) At the May 5, 2015 Council Meeting 4) Read Ordinance No. 2015-02 by title for the final time 5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2015-02 by title for the final time (if approved above) 6) Adopt Ordinance No. 2015-02 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The City Council approved a preannexation agreement in January 2014 for the annexation of the three parcels subject to this request. This agreement allowed for the extension of necessary water and sewer infrastructure to serve potential future development of the W.L. Gore Woody Mountain campus which is located in both City of Flagstaff and Coconino County jurisdictions. Because this annexation surrounds rights-of-way under County jurisdiction it is proposed to include those rights-of-ways in this annexation to better serve future development of these sites. The Planning & Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this annexation to the City Council on March 11, 2015. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The City of Flagstaff participated in the upsizing of a water line to serve the proposed annexation area as well as potential future growth. Final cost for the City has not yet been determined but is less than $325,000. W.L. Gore intends to construct a gravity sewer line to their site as well. The City has agreed to participate in the upsizing of this sewer line to serve future growth in the area. The City may also need to extend a portion of this line to serve the proposed Core Services Maintenance facility located at McAllister Ranch. Costs for the upsizing and extension were included in the utility rate study but official estimates have not yet been developed.
|
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 9) Foster relationships and maintain economic development commitment to partners REGIONAL PLAN: A full policy analysis of the goals and policies of the Regional Plan that relate this annexation can be found in the attached Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report. Below are the goals that were included in that analysis
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
A pre-annexation agreement was approved by Council in 2005 for APN 116-04-007F, one of the parcels subject to this annexation request. This agreement allowed for new construction built under County jurisdiction to connect with existing City of Flagstaff water and sewer infrastructure. A second pre-annexation agreement was approved by Council in January 2014 for all three parcels subject to this annexation request. This pre-annexation agreement included approval for the upgrade and construction of a new water line along Route 66 and Flagstaff Ranch Road to improve fire flows and provide for future growth in this area. |
|||||
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 W.L. Gore to annex 135.91 acres located at the intersection of Flagstaff Ranch Road and W. Kiltie Lane. The area subject to this annexation consists of three Assessor’s Parcels including 116-04-008E a 71.82 acre parcel, 116-04-003Y a 42.56 acre parcel (both located west of Flagstaff Ranch Road) and 116-04-007F a 21.54 acre parcel (located east of Flagstaff Ranch Road). The two parcels located west of Flagstaff Ranch Road are currently vacant and the parcel located to the east of Flagstaff Ranch Road is partially developed with a research and development facility operated by W.L. Gore. All parcels to be annexed are located within the Urban Growth Boundary. Two pre-annexation agreements have been approved for the subject properties. The first agreement was completed in 2005 for the construction of the facility on parcel 116-04-007F which allowed for the extension of the existing water and sewer lines from the other W.L. Gore facilities located within the city limits along W. Kiltie Lane. This pre-annexation agreement had a term of five years. In January 2014 a second pre-annexation agreement was completed that included all three parcels subject to this request. This agreement allowed for the extension and development of a new water line along W. Route 66 from Woody Mountain Road to Flagstaff Ranch Road and then along Flagstaff Ranch Road to W. Kiltie Lane creating a looped water system. The most recent pre-annexation agreement was completed prior to the adoption and ratification of the Flagstaff Regional Plan 2030 (FRP 2030) and was approved based on compliance with the Flagstaff Area Regional Land Use and Transportation Plan (RLUTP). For comparison purposes, policies from both plans are identified and discussed in this report. The RLUTP designates the subject parcels as Office/Business – Park/Light Industrial and the FRP 2030 designates the subject parcels as Suburban/Future Employment. The Office/Business – Park/Light Industrial land use category is intended to encourage the development of offices and planned business parks; to promote excellence in the design and planning of buildings, outdoor spaces, and transportation facilities; and to continue the vitality and quality of life in adjacent residential neighborhoods. The Future Employment land use category includes Office – Research and Development – Business Park – Light Industrial, Light-Medium Industrial and Heavy Industrial. The Suburban land use category includes single-family residential and multi-family residential development, as well as commercial development such as strip centers and big box stores with large parking lots to a mixture of retail establishments, office buildings, automobile dealerships, gas stations, and motels. The land use category designations originate from two different studies that considered the impacts and needs if the West Side was annexed into the City of Flagstaff. The first was completed in 1989 around the same time W.L. Gore annexed 50 acres in the 4000 Block of South Woody Mountain Road. An update was prepared to this plan in 1999 (West Side Small Area Plan and Infrastructure Study) which was incorporated into the 2001 Regional Land Use and Transportation Study. The plan includes a review and update of background information for the planning area, a generalized concept land use plan, infrastructure system plans, and a revenue/cost analysis update. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Annexations are adopted by the City Council via ordinance. Ordinance No. 2015-02 annexes 135.91 acres located at 4100 & 4250 W. Kiltie Lane into the City of Flagstaff. Prior to the second read of Ordinance No. 2015-02 the County Board of Supervisors will approve transfer of the adjoining rights-of-way to the annexation parcels. | |||||
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 February 25, 2015. A preannexation agreement approved in January 2014 allowed W.L. Gore to move forward extending a new water line along Route 66 from Woody Mountain Road, along Flagstaff Ranch Road to Kiltie Lane. The completion of this water line created the looped water system infrastructure necessary to provide adequate fire flows at the existing W.L. Gore facilities as well as for future development of their properties included in this annexation. Additionally, W.L. Gore intends to extend a gravity sewer line to service the subject properties as well as future growth in the surrounding area. The gravity sewer will allow W.L. Gore to abandon their existing lift station which is costly to maintain and operate. Annexing these properties also provides for extended development opportunities to the largest private employer in the City of Flagstaff. The growth of their campus will allow for the expansion and retention of a significant employee base. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform/Consult Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council are conducted in conjunction with any annexation request. In accordance with Arizona Revised Statutes, notice of the public hearing was provided by placing an ad in the Daily Sun, positing a notice on the public hearing, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. As of the writing of this report staff received one phone call requesting additional information about the annexation. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing on March 11, 2015 at 4 p.m. No one from the public spoke on the case. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Attachments: | P&Z Commission Staff Report | ||||
Annexation Application | |||||
Preannexation Agreement | |||||
Notice of Annexation | |||||
Concept Plan | |||||
Zoning Boundaries | |||||
Ordinance 2015-02 | |||||
Exhibit B | |||||
Exhibit F | |||||
Exhibit I | |||||
Exhibit J | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
15.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-02: A resolution of the Mayor and Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona adopting the Community Reinvestment Plan (Community Reinvestment Plan) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2015-02 by title only
2) Clerk reads Resolution No. 2015-02 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2015-02 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The Community Reinvestment Plan presents an over-arching policy as well as objectives and potential actions to implement the policy. The development of the Plan involved talking to our customers, research of how other communities have approached this policy goal, a preliminary analysis (current activities, obvious basic legal challenges, and potential effectiveness), discussion with all affected City Divisions and Sections, and discussion with the City Council over the course of four years. The adoption of this Plan establishes the Community Reinvestment Plan as a formal policy of the City. While the objectives and possible implementation strategies included in the Plan have survived the preliminary cut and merit further development, they remain “possibilities” that can be further evaluated and further shaped. A notable amount of work remains in developing the remaining possibilities. Staff will need to prepare specific actions, ordinances and other mechanisms, for future City Council consideration and possible adoption. The adoption of this plan thus provides direction to staff to include this work in their future budgeting and work programs. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
Simply developing the implementation strategies has cost implications including staff time, hiring consultants, or additional staff. Projects potentially could experience delay as staff develops these strategies. Implementation strategies themselves have more significant costs associated with them with the more effective strategies generating higher costs. Funding allocations by the City Council are necessary to develop the options and more will again be necessary in the future for implementation.
|
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 7) Address key issues and processes related to the implementation of the Regional Plan REGIONAL PLAN: The Flagstaff Regional Plan 2030 includes a series of goals and policies that support community reinvestment as an objective. The goals and policies include less direct goals regarding community reinvestment such as preserving resources and open spaces, efficient infrastructure, energy efficiency, urban land-uses and development patterns, and multimodal commuting. However, the Regional Plan also directly calls for compact development, investing in existing neighborhoods and urban areas, adaptive re-use, historic preservation, and promoting infill and redevelopment. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
At a Regular Meeting on March 3, 2015, the City Council provided the most recent direction that serves as the basis of this draft of the Community Reinvestment Plan. Per the direction provided, the annotations of the Plan have been deleted and the text modified to include more flexible language for any possible City Council actions in the future. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Adopt Plan. 2) Do not adopt plan and provide staff with direction for continued development of the plan. 3) Do not adopt plan. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
In 2010 at the direction of the City Council, staff initiated a community discussion about redevelopment and infill. The concept of "redevelopment and infill" was later expanded to "reinvestment" to be more inclusive of different types of redevelopment and to avoid cultural and legal connotations of the word "redevelopment". The City Council sought ways to motivate developers to reinvest in developed areas instead of investing in green fields. This process included citizens, City customers and internal stakeholders and it identified areas where our current policies and codes were unfavorable to reinvestment. The next step involved researching how other communities have addressed this same concern. This was extensive research of municipal, county, state, and Federal efforts nationwide. This generated a "raw data" collection of ideas that did not evaluate success, legality, cost, or any other factors - simply identifying "What has been tried?" This list was then taken back out to the stakeholders for discussion. (In bullet form, the list is included in the October 2013 Staff Memo to the City Council.) These discussions allowed us to separate out the ideas into "could be done" (Green boxes on the list), those with "fatal flaws" (Red boxes), and those that required City Council direction (Yellow boxes). In October of 2013, the items that required preliminary City Council direction were brought to a Work Session and discussed. The City Council provided direction that was then used to develop a Draft Community Reinvestment Plan. City staff then considered this complete list (green, yellow, and red) but also "thinned" the list of ideas and further refined the plan for City Council consideration. Presented for adoption on March 3, 2015, the City Council expressed a desire for the explanatory annotations to be deleted and for the text to be modified to include more flexible language for any possible City Council actions in the future. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
See "Financial Impact". |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Detailed cost expectations can be provided as implementation strategies are brought before the City Council for consideration. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Elimination of blight: A deteriorating area results in a negative image that affects economic vitality elsewhere in the community. This impacts not only tourism but also business attraction, retention, and expansion. Prevention of urban sprawl and more compact use of infrastructure and more effective use of lands that may be vacant, underutilized or needing refresh. Creation of new sources of tax revenue: Deteriorating areas cannot pay their own way and reinvestment puts non-producing or under-producing properties back on the tax rolls. Not only does reinvestment provide retail in underserved areas, it also provides neighborhood jobs, thus reducing personal and municipal costs of commuting. Reduction of pollution/environmental contamination: The re-use of buildings and infrastructure reduces materials in the landfill, consumption of raw materials, and the transportation costs associated with hauling out the old and hauling in the new. Import substitution: A central strategy in building a sustainable local economy is import substitution – creating locally what otherwise would have to be purchased elsewhere. Almost by definition reinvestment is locally based, using expertise, labor, and materials from the local market. Often new construction is the opposite, requiring the importation of expertise, materials, and often labor from elsewhere. Cultural preservation: Our sense of place, identity, evolution, ownership, and community. These are referred to as the Five Senses of Quality Communities and will, in the intermediate and long term, have considerable impact on the economic health of individual communities. All of these benefits provide the citizens of Flagstaff with an improved quality of life. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Collaborate - See "Background" section above. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Adopt Plan.
2. Do not adopt plan and provide staff with direction for continued development of the plan. This option would allow the City Council to add or delete any materials or concepts that are or are not desired. 3. Do not adopt plan. This option would not provide any different policy for reinvestment than currently exists. |
|||||
Attachments: | Plan Document | ||||
Res 2015-02 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
15.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Grant Application: Arizona State Parks FY 2015 Recreational Trails Program Grant for Picture Canyon. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the grant application to Arizona State Parks FY 2015 Recreational Trails Program for a total estimated project cost of $128,506 ($74,446 grant/ $54,060 match).
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
Since 2012, the City of Flagstaff has acquired 2,700 acres of open space through the Arizona State Parks Growing Smarter Grant process in conjunction with City open space bond funds. City staff are now faced with the challenge of how to properly manage and maintain Picture Canyon Natural and Cultural Preserve and Observatory Mesa Natural Area within the guidelines of the conservation easements while taking into account public access and the protection of cultural resources. The goal of this resolution is to offset a portion of the significant costs associated with trail construction and signs with a grant through Arizona State Parks. Staff recommends that Council support the grant application to fund some of the extensive access and infrastructure improvements required at Picture Canyon, covering costs we would have to cover without it. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
In the event of a successful grant application, it is anticipated the estimated $54,060 in matching funds will comprise of $32,000 from the National Park Service, $5,000 from the Flagstaff Sustainability Program Open Space budget, and $17,060 from volunteer work. |
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 3) Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics. 8) Improve effectiveness of notification, communication, and engagement with residents, neighborhoods and businesses and about City services, programs, policies, projects and developments. 9) Foster relationships and maintain economic development commitment to partners. REGIONAL PLAN: Goal E&C.6. Protect, restore, and improve ecosystem health and maintain native plant and animal community diversity across all land ownerships in the Flagstaff region. Goal E&C.8. Maintain areas of natural quiet and reduce noise pollution. Goal E&C.9. Protect soils through conservation practices. Goal E&C.10. Protect indigenous wildlife populations, localized and larger-scale wildlife habitats, ecosystem processes, and wildlife movement areas throughout the planning area. Goal 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. Goal LU.3. Continue to enhance the region's unique sense of place within the urban, suburban, and rural context (Policy LU.3.3). Goal WR.6. Protect, preserve, and improve the quality of surface water, groundwater, and reclaimed water in the region. Goal CC.2. Preserve, restore, and rehabilitate heritage resources to better appreciate our culture. Goal ED.7. Continue to promote and enhance Flagstaff’s unique sense of place as an economic driver. Goal 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 June 7, 2011, Council adopted Resolution 2011-22 in support of the preservation of Picture Canyon. On April 3, 2012, Council adopted Resolution 2012-12 to reclassify Picture Canyon for conservation purposes. On July 15, 2014, Council adopted Resolution 2014-29 in support of dedicating two trails in Picture Canyon Natural and Cultural Preserve the “Tom Moody Trail” and “Don Weaver Trail”. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Option A – Adopt Resolution No. 2015-09 as submitted and authorize submission of the grant application; Option B – Not adopt Resolution No. 2015-09 and do not authorize submission of the grant application. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
As critical wildlife habitat and a popular recreation corridor, Picture Canyon is a natural and cultural amenity for the northern Arizona community. Efforts to formally protect Picture Canyon started decades ago. A milestone was achieved in August 2011 when the City of Flagstaff Open Spaces Commission approved the application for a Growing Smarter Grant for the acquisition of Picture Canyon. In April 2012, the State Land Commissioner ordered that Picture Canyon be reclassified as suitable for conservation purposes. Council approved the application to acquire Picture Canyon for conservation purposes through the Growing Smarter Grant process in April 2012 with Resolution 2012-12. Since its acquisition, City staff have utilized limited City resources to improve conditions at Picture Canyon, including naturalizing roads, installing signs, and developing parking areas. However, substantial work remains to improve and restore the Preserve, including constructing and maintaining trails, naturalizing roads, and installing trail markers and educational signs. In particular, constructing usable and identifiable trails will help concentrate visitor use and reduce negative impacts on archaeological sites.
|
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Resolution No. 2015-09 requires that the City comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, rules, standards, procedures, and guidelines related to the Recreational Trails Program Grant application. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
The resolution certifies that the City will supply $54,060 in match funds to complete projects outlined in the grant application. In the event of a successful grant application, the estimated $54,060 in matching funds will comprise of $32,000 from the National Park Service in in-kind work, $5,000 from the Flagstaff Sustainability Program Open Space budget, and $17,060 from volunteer in-kind work. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Improving the trail system at Picture Canyon by constructing and maintaining trails, naturalizing roads, and installing trail markers and educational signs will help protect cultural resources, meet requirements of the conservation easement and improve visitor experiences at Picture Canyon. Additionally, these projects will provide an opportunity for members of the Flagstaff community to learn about geology, ecology, hydrology, and archaeology while engaging in outdoor recreation. Well constructed trails benefit the community as a tool for natural and cultural resource protection. When properly designed and signed, trails mitigate damage by controlling public access when they route visitors through or around sensitive resource areas as well as reduce erosion and stormwater run-off issues. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Involve. The proposed grant-funded projects have been vetted through the Picture Canyon Working Group, the City of Flagstaff Open Spaces Commission, and Arizona State Parks as these entities reviewed the planned actions in the draft Picture Canyon Management Plan. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Option A – Adopt Resolution No. 2015-09 as submitted and authorize submission of the grant application; Option B – Not adopt Resolution No. 2015-09 and do not authorize submission of the grant application. |
|||||
Attachments: | Arizona State Parks Grant Application | ||||
Arizona State Parks Grant Criteria | |||||
Resolution 2015-09 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
15.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2015-12: A resolution of the Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona declaring for purposes of Section 1.150-2 of the Federal Treasury Regulations, official intent to be reimbursed in connection with certain capital expenditures relating to the Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative. (Reimbursement resolution for the Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative). | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2015-12 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2015-12 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No.2015-12 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
In November 2014, Flagstaff voters approved Question No. 406 for the Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative (RRSSI) transaction privilege tax (TPT). As part of this question, $20 million dollars in debt to accelerate construction in the first seven years of the tax was approved. This resolution allows the City to reimburse itself for expenditures made on behalf of this project before the financing is secured. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The expenditures for the various projects related to the RRSSI TPT will be reimbursed from future bond proceeds. The bond will be paid back from the TPT proceeds. A total of $20,000,000 in bonding was authorized in question 406. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics REGIONAL PLAN: WR.2.2 - Maintain and develop facilities to provide reliable, safe, and cost-effective water, wastewater, and reclaimed water services. T.11 - Build and sustain public support for the implementation of transportation planning goals and policies, including the financial underpinnings of the Plan, by actively seeking meaningful community involvement. T.11.5 - Promote effective intergovernmental relations through agreed upon procedures to consult, cooperate, and coordinate transportation related activities and decisions, including regional efforts to secure funding for the improvement of transportation services, infrastructure, and facilities. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
YES. November 4, 2014 Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative Election. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Approve the Reimbursement Resolution. Do not approve the Reimbursement Resolution. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
On November 4, 2014, a general election was held by the City of Flagstaff whereby the citizens authorized the Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative. This is a 0.33 percent (%) transaction privilege tax for a 20 year period to be used exclusively to pay for street improvements and the ongoing preservation of street condition inside the City limits which include improvements to:
The work program is accelerated in the first seven years to be able to quickly advance road repairs on those streets in greatest need throughout the city. To accomplish this task, debt must be issued as the street/utility costs exceed the amount of RRSSI TPT revenue that will be generated in the same period. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
IRS regulations are very specific as to what capital expenditures are eligible for reimbursement. These expenditures must be any cost of a type that is properly chargeable to a capital account (or would be or chargeable with a proper election) under general federal income tax guidelines. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
The City is planning on issuing the $20 million dollars in new debt authorized in two series. The first $10,000,000 is currently planned to be issued in either late 2015 or early 2016. The second and final $10,000,000 is anticipated to be issued in 2018. The timing for the second issuance will be dependent on the City work program and at what time the City needs the additional funds to pay for the projects. The debt payments will be made from the RRSSI TPT. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
This resolution allows capital project timing to not be hampered by the issuance of the related debt. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Empower - Approved by City voters on November 4, 2014.
|
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Approve the Reimbursement Resolution
Do not approve the Reimbursement Resolution.
|
|||||
Attachments: | Res. 2015-12 | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
15.D.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration of Election Dates for Future Municipal Elections | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Direct staff to prepare a ballot question to the voters at the November 2015 Special Election for Charter amendments to hold municipal elections in the fall of even-numbered years on dates consistent with state law.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The current City Charter calls for primary and general elections to be held on dates that are inconsistent with the four dates permitted by state law for holding elections. In 1997 an ordinance was adopted to clarify that the primary and general elections of the City would be held in the spring (March and May), the closest dates to those in the Charter. Beginning in 2014 all municipalities in Arizona were required to hold their candidate elections in the fall of even-numbered years regardless of charters; therefore, Flagstaff's 2014 elections, which would have normally been held in March and May, were held in August and November. A recent decision in the Court of Appeals determined that charters supersede state law; this decision was appealed and the Arizona Supreme Court has denied the request for review. Therefore, the question of when municipal elections are held in Flagstaff is a matter of local concern for charter cities; however, the City's Charter is still inconsistent with the four dates permitted for holding elections. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The staff-recommended action (fall even-numbered years) is the most cost-effective approach for holding municipal elections, currently at $2.00 per registered voter, along with additional expenses for publication/advertising, etc. The other options for spring of even-numbered years and spring/fall of odd-numbered years are:
|
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS:
8) Improve effectiveness of notification, communication, and engagement with residents, neighborhoods and businesses and about City services, programs, policies, projects and developments |
|||||
Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Yes, the City Council reviewed the various dates at its Work Session of February 24, 2015, at which time the question was raised as to whether each election date could be forwarded to the voters. The answer to this question is yes, as will be summarized by the City Attorney's Office under separate cover. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Direct staff to place a question on the November 2015 ballot as recommended by staff; 2) Direct staff to place a different question on the November 2015 ballot; 3) Direct staff to place all four potential times for elections, or any combination thereof, on the November 2015 ballot; 4) Place any or all questions on the ballot at a different time. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The current City Charter calls for primary and general elections to be held on dates that are inconsistent with the four dates permitted by state law for holding elections [spring (March/May and fall (August/November). In 1997 an ordinance was adopted to clarify that the primary and general elections of the City would be held in the spring (March and May), the closest dates to those in the Charter. Beginning in 2014 all municipalities in Arizona were required to hold their candidate elections in the fall of even-numbered years regardless of charters; therefore, Flagstaff's 2014 elections, which would have normally been held in March and May, were held in August and November. A recent decision in the Court of Appeals determined that charters supersede state law; this decision was appealed and the Arizona Supreme Court has denied the request for review. Therefore, the question of when municipal elections are held in Flagstaff is a matter of local concern for those cities with charters; however, the City's current Charter is still inconsistent with the four dates permitted for holding elections. This memo provides details on the pros/cons of the various dates and includes a recommendation from staff. | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The City Council has two questions to answer: 1) When do you want to hold municipal elections in Flagstaff? As has been discussed at past meetings, there are pros/cons for each election date; however, based on the issues considered in the attached Potential Benefits/Considerations document , while recognizing that this is the decision of the City Council, staff's recommendation is that the City Council consider holding the elections in conjunction with statewide elections in the fall of even-numbered years based on the following: A) Least cost B) Term length of Council members would be closest to current lengths C) Increased voter turnout (not from a political perspective but strictly as the City's Election Official to increase voter turnout) 2) When do you want to present the question(s) to the voters? State law does allow such questions to be directed to the voters; however, each proposed amendment would be required to be voted on separately. Additionally, a Charter amendment is not effective unless approved by a majority of the qualified electors voting on it; therefore, the more questions presented the less chance that a majority vote for one date would be achieved. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Empower The ultimate power of the citizens is in the ability to voice their preference at an election. |
|||||
Attachments: | History.Updated | ||||
Possible Dates | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||