FINAL 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 | |||||||||
A. | Consideration and Approval of Minutes: City Council Work Session of November 10, 2015; Budget Retreat of December 9, 2015; Regular Meeting of April 5, 2016; Special Meeting (Executive Session) of April 5, 2016; and Special Meeting (Executive Session) of April 12, 2016. | |||||||||
5. | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public Participation enables the public to address the Council about an item that is not on the agenda. 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). |
|||||||||
8. | LIQUOR LICENSE PUBLIC HEARINGS | |||||||||
A. |
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Danny Thomas, “Express Liquors", 5620 N. Highway 89., Series 09 (liquor store - all spirituous liquor), Person Transfer.
|
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Hold the Public Hearing; absent any valid concerns received from the public hearing, staff recommends the Council forward a recommendation for approval to the State.
|
||||||||||
B. |
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Cecily Clift Maniaci, “Hoot Mart", 101 E. Birch Ave., Series 10 (beer and wine store), New License.
|
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Hold the Public Hearing; absent any valid concerns received from the public hearing, staff recommends the Council forward a recommendation for approval to the State.
|
||||||||||
C. |
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Vipul Patel, “Fort Valley Chevron", 1312 N. Fort Valley Rd, Series 10 (beer and wine store), New License.
|
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Hold the Public Hearing; absent any valid concerns received from the public hearing, staff recommends the Council forward a recommendation for approval to the State.
|
||||||||||
D. | Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Robert Delgado, "Hensley Beverage Company", 1850 E. Butler Rd., Series 04 (wholesaler), New License. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Hold the Public Hearing; absent any valid concerns received from the public hearing, staff recommends the Council forward a recommendation for approval to the State.
|
||||||||||
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 Contract: Airport Master Plan Update and Aeronautical Geographical Information System (AGIS) Survey Contract. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the contract with Coffman and Associates to update the Airport Master Plan and provide a Aeronautical GIS Survey. The contract is in the amount of $520,684. This will allow the City to go through a public process to plan for the future of the Flagstaff Airport. |
||||||||||
B. | Consideration and Approval of Contract: Audit Services Contract with Clifton Larson Allen. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve contract with Clifton Larson Allen for Professional Audit Services to perform annual audits of the City's financial records for the years ended June 30, 2016 through June 30, 2019 at the annual fees as follows:
- June 30, 2016: $77,910
- June 30, 2017: $80,410
- June 30, 2018: $81,560
- June 30, 2019: $82,300
|
||||||||||
C. | Consideration and Approval of Contract: Citywide Professional On-call Consulting Services: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Engineering, Geotechnical and Survey. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Approve the fifteen (15) On-Call Professional Services contracts for the following firms and disciplines:
Architecture: Johnson Walzer Associates and Loven Contracting
Landscape Architecture: The WLB Group and Kimley-Horn
Engineering: Civil Design Engineers, Peak Engineering, Plateau Engineering, Shephard Wesnitzer Inc., Turner Engineering, The WLB Group and Woodson Engineering
Geotechnical: Speedie and Associates, and Western Technologies
Survey: Shephard Wesnitzer Inc. and Woodson Engineering
2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents.
|
||||||||||
10. | ROUTINE ITEMS | |||||||||
A. | Consideration of Audited Financial Reports: Year ending June 30, 2015. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the FY 2015 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and approve the FY 2015 Single Audit Report (as reissued).
|
||||||||||
B. | Consideration and Approval of Contract: Approve the renewal of our Workers' Compensation contract with Copperpoint Mutual Insurance (Workers Compensation Insurance Contract). | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the renewal of our Workers' Compensation contract with Copperpoint Mutual Insurance at an estimated annual cost of $730,000.
|
||||||||||
C. | Consideration and Approval of Contract: Approve the renewal of our Casualty insurance with Travelers Insurance and our Property coverage with AIG insurance. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Approve the renewal of our Casualty insurance with Travelers Insurance and our Property coverage with AIG insurance at a total estimated annual cost of $850,000.
|
||||||||||
D. | Consideration and Approval of Contract: Sunnyside Phase V-C Improvement Project. (Approval of a road-construction contract in Sunnyside). | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Approve the construction contract with RTR Paving and Resurfacing, Inc. in the amount of $615,077.70 with a contract period of 135 calendar days; 2) Approve a contract allowance of $60,000 to cover the potential costs associated with unanticipated or additional items of work; 3) Authorize Change Order Authority for the City Manager in the amount of $61,508 (10% of the contract amount); 4) Authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents. |
||||||||||
E. | Update on Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) Re: Naval Observatory Flagstaff Station and Camp Navajo and a request to appoint two Council members to serve on the Policy Committee. | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Receive and discuss information regarding the Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) and appoint two Councilmembers to serve on the JLUS Policy Committee.
|
||||||||||
F. |
Community Development Block Grant Program: |
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2016-15 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2016-15 (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-15 4) Read Resolution No. 2016-16 by title only
5) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2016-16 (if approved above) 6) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-16 7) Read Resolution No. 2016-17 by title only
8) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2016-17 (if approved above) 9) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-17 |
||||||||||
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. | Ordinances re Open Space Designations The following items are all proposed to address annexations and rezoning for City-owned land for public recreation and open space purposes and will be considered during one Public Hearing, followed by individual actions. |
|||||||||
1. | Observatory Mesa | |||||||||
a. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-20: 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 Statutes, by annexing certain land totaling approximately 640.51 acres located in Section 12, Township 21 North, Range 6 East, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, and establishing city zoning for said land as Public Open Space (POS) for 640.51 acres. (Observatory Mesa Annexation) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-20 by title only for the final time |
||||||||||
b. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-21: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 1610.69 acres of real property located on Observatory Mesa, from Rural Residential ("RR") to Public Open Space ("POS"), and approximately 2.0 acres from Rural Residential ("RR") to Public Facility ("PF") and to apply the Resource Protection Overlay ("RPO") to approximately 640.51 acres. (Observatory Mesa Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-21 by title only for the final time |
||||||||||
2. | Picture Canyon | |||||||||
a. |
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-18: 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 Statutes, by annexing certain land totaling approximately 77.8 acres located in Section 4, Township 21 North, Range 8 East, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, and establishing no city zoning for said land. (Picture Canyon Annexation) |
|||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-18 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-18 by title for the final time (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-18 |
||||||||||
b. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-19: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 477.8 acres of real property known as Picture Canyon, from No Zoning (County) and Rural Residential (RR) to Public Open Space (POS), and to apply the Landmarks Overlay (LO), the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) and the Rural Floodplain Designation to approximately 77.8 acres. (Picture Canyon Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-19 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-19 by title for the final time (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-19 |
||||||||||
3. | Buffalo Park West | |||||||||
a. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-16: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 26.03 acres of real property located at the northeast corner of Fir Avenue and North San Francisco Street, from Single Family Residential (R1) and Public Facility (PF) to Public Open Space (POS), and to apply the Rural Floodplain Designation. (Buffalo Park West Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-16 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-16 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-16 |
||||||||||
4. | Guadalupe Park | |||||||||
a. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-15: An ordinance of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 1.07 acres of real property located at 805 West Clay Avenue, from Highway Commercial (HC) to Public Facility (PF). (Guadalupe Park Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-15 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-15 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-15 |
||||||||||
5. | Highland Avenue Parcels | |||||||||
a. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-17: An ordinance of the City of Flagstaff amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 5.31 acres of real property located off Highland Avenue from Highway Commercial (HC) to Public Facility (PF). (Highland Avenue Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-17 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-17 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-17 |
||||||||||
B. | Public Hearing, Consideration, and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-24: 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 0.81 acres located in Section 7, Township 21 North, Range 8 East, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, and establishing City zoning for said land as Rural Residential (RR) for 0.81 acres, providing for severability, authority for clerical corrections, and establishing an effective date. (Marquardt Annexation - Mountain Meadow Drive) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-24 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-24 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-24 |
||||||||||
C. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-23: An ordinance of the Flagstaff City Council amending Title 7, Health and Sanitation, and Title 12, Floodplain, of the Flagstaff City Code, by amending Chapters 7-02-001-0039, Sewer Use Charges, Capacity Charges; 7-03-001-0010, Water Rates; and 7-03-001-0011, Water Main Capacity Charges; 7-03-001-0014 Water Conservation and Chapter 12-02-002-0003, Schedule of Stormwater Management Utility Service Charges and Fees, thereof. (Ordinance increasing certain utility rates, charges and fees) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-23 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-23 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-23 |
||||||||||
D. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Resolution No. 2016-13 and Ordinance No. 2016-22: Public hearing to consider proposed amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code, Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), and other related amendments in Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions) and Chapter 10-90 (Maps); consideration of Resolution No. 2016-13 declaring the proposed amendments as a public record; and adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-22, adopting amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), and other related amendments in Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions) and Chapter 10-90 (Maps), by reference. (Zoning Code Amendments - Sign Standards) | |||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||
Continue the Public Hearing to May 3, 2016.
|
||||||||||
15. | REGULAR AGENDA | |||||||||
A. | Discussion and Possible Action re: Current Issues Before the Arizona Legislature | |||||||||
B. | Consideration and Possible Action: Change to Summer Break Dates. | |||||||||
16. | DISCUSSION ITEMS | |||||||||
17. | FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS After discussion and upon agreement by a majority of all members of the Council, an item will be moved to a regularly-scheduled Council meeting. |
|||||||||
A. | Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A request by Councilmember Putzova to place on a future agenda a discussion on strategies and implementation of the Regional Plan's climate change goals and policies. | |||||||||
B. | Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A request by Mayor Nabours to place on a future agenda a discussion on deleting the requirement that developers pay to the I-40/Lonetree traffic interchange. | |||||||||
C. | Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A request by Mayor Nabours to place on a future agenda a discussion on using Pine Canyon fees for Lonetree improvements | |||||||||
18. | INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS FROM COUNCIL AND STAFF, FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS | |||||||||
19. | ADJOURNMENT | |||||||||
|
4.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Minutes: City Council Work Session of November 10, 2015; Budget Retreat of December 9, 2015; Regular Meeting of April 5, 2016; Special Meeting (Executive Session) of April 5, 2016; and Special Meeting (Executive Session) of April 12, 2016. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Amend/approve the minutes of the Work Session of November 10, 2015; Budget Retreat of December 9, 2015; Regular Meeting of April 5, 2016; Special Meeting (Executive Session) of April 5, 2016; and Special Meeting (Executive Session) of April 12, 2016.
|
|||||
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: | |||||
Minutes of City Council meetings are a requirement of Arizona Revised Statutes and, additionally, provide a method of informing the public of discussions and actions being taken by the City Council. | |||||
INFORMATION: | |||||
COUNCIL GOAL
|
|||||
Attachments: | 11.10.2015.CCWS.Minutes | ||||
12.09.2015.CCBR.Minutes | |||||
04.05.2016.CCRM.Minutes | |||||
04.05.2016.CCSMES.Minutes | |||||
04.12.2016.CCSMES.Minutes | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
8.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Danny Thomas, “Express Liquors", 5620 N. Highway 89., Series 09 (liquor store - all spirituous liquor), Person Transfer.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold the Public Hearing; absent any valid concerns received from the public hearing, staff recommends the Council forward a recommendation for approval to the State.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The liquor license process begins at the State level and applications are then forwarded to the respective municipality for posting of the property and holding a public hearing, after which the Council recommendation is forwarded back to the State. Series 09 (Liquor Store - all spirituous liquor) licenses are obtained through the person transfer of an existing license from another person and allows a spirituous liquor store retailer to sell all spirituous liquors, only in the original unbroken package, to be taken away from the premises of the retailer and consumed off the premises. Express Liquors is currently operating with a Series 9 liquor license; the person transfer is required because of the recent sale of the business. The property has been posted as required, and the Police, Community Development, and Sales Tax divisions have reviewed the application with no concerns noted. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Liquor licenses are a regulatory action and there is no Council goal that applies. | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a person transfer, consideration may be given to only the applicant's personal qualifications. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is April 30, 2016. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. We are not aware of any other relevant considerations. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
The application was properly posted on March 24, 2016. No written protests have been received to date. | |||||
Attachments: | Express Liquors - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 9 Description | |||||
Express - PD Memo | |||||
Express - Code Memo | |||||
Express - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
8.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Cecily Clift Maniaci, “Hoot Mart", 101 E. Birch Ave., Series 10 (beer and wine store), New License.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold the Public Hearing; absent any valid concerns received from the public hearing, staff recommends the Council forward a recommendation for approval to the State.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The liquor license process begins at the State level and applications are then forwarded to the respective municipality for posting of the property and holding a public hearing, after which the Council recommendation is forwarded back to the State. A Series 10 license allows a retail store to sell beer and wine (no other spirituous liquors), only in the original unbroken package, to be taken away from the premises of the retailer and consumed off the premises. The property has been posted as required, and the Police Department, Community Development, and Sales Tax divisions have reviewed the application with no concerns noted. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Liquor licenses are a regulatory action and there is no Council goal that applies.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a new license, consideration may be given to both the applicant's personal qualifications and the location. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is May 13, 2016. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. We are not aware of any other relevant considerations. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
The application was properly posted on March 30, 2016. No written protests have been received to date. | |||||
Attachments: | Hoot Mart - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 10 Description | |||||
Hoot Mart - PD Memo | |||||
Hoot Mart - Code Memo | |||||
Hoot Mart - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
8.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Vipul Patel, “Fort Valley Chevron", 1312 N. Fort Valley Rd, Series 10 (beer and wine store), New License.
|
|||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold the Public Hearing; absent any valid concerns received from the public hearing, staff recommends the Council forward a recommendation for approval to the State.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The liquor license process begins at the State level and applications are then forwarded to the respective municipality for posting of the property and holding a public hearing, after which the Council recommendation is forwarded back to the State. A Series 10 license allows a retail store to sell beer and wine (no other spirituous liquors), only in the original unbroken package, to be taken away from the premises of the retailer and consumed off the premises. Fort Valley Chevron is an existing business that was recently sold and is under new management. The property has been posted as required, and the Police Department, Community Development, and Sales Tax divisions have reviewed the application with no concerns noted. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Liquor licenses are a regulatory action and there is no Council goal that applies.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a new license, consideration may be given to both the applicant's personal qualifications and the location. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is April 25, 2016. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. We are not aware of any other relevant considerations. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
The application was properly posted on March 30, 2016. No written protests have been received to date. | |||||
Attachments: | FV Chevron - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 10 Description | |||||
FV Chevron - PD Memo | |||||
FV Chevron - Code Memo | |||||
FV Chevron - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
8.D.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Action on Liquor License Application: Robert Delgado, "Hensley Beverage Company", 1850 E. Butler Rd., Series 04 (wholesaler), New License. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Hold the Public Hearing; absent any valid concerns received from the public hearing, staff recommends the Council forward a recommendation for approval to the State.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The liquor license process begins at the State level and applications are then forwarded to the respective municipality for posting of the property and holding a public hearing, after which the Council recommendation is forwarded back to the State. A Series 04 license allows a wholesaler to warehouse, sell and distribute all types of spirituous liquor (beer, wine, distilled spirits) to Arizona-licensed retailers. Hensley Beverage Company recently purchased Golden Eagle Distributors and will continue to operate at the same location. The property has been posted as required, and the Police, Community Development, and Sales Tax divisions have reviewed the application with no concerns noted. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no budgetary impact to the City of Flagstaff as this is a recommendation to the State. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Liquor licenses are a regulatory action and there is no Council goal that applies. | |||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Not applicable. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Table the item if additional information or time is needed. 2) Make no recommendation. 3) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for approval. 4) Forward the application to the State with a recommendation for denial, stating the reasons for such recommendation. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Because the application is for a new license, consideration may be given to both the location and the applicant's personal qualifications. The deadline for issuing a recommendation on this application is May 10, 2016. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
This business will contribute to the tax base of the community. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
The application was properly posted on March 30, 2016. No written protests have been received to date. | |||||
Attachments: | Hensley - Letter to Applicant | ||||
Hearing Procedures | |||||
Series 04 description | |||||
Hensley - PD Memo | |||||
Hensley - Code Memo | |||||
Hensley - Tax Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
9.A.
| |||||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Contract: Airport Master Plan Update and Aeronautical Geographical Information System (AGIS) Survey Contract. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the contract with Coffman and Associates to update the Airport Master Plan and provide a Aeronautical GIS Survey. The contract is in the amount of $520,684. This will allow the City to go through a public process to plan for the future of the Flagstaff Airport. |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires airport sponsors to vet their grant requests through a Master Planning process. This process assures the FAA that the sponsor has public input, and the grant award matches future growth needs of the airport. The Airport Master Plan will include existing inventory, future growth of enplanements and traffic. It will also include an official Airport Layout Plan ( ALP map), as well as a list of short, medium and long range projects. The ALP is now required to be in an electronic format to allow updates. With the Aeronautical Geographical Information System (AGIS) survey, we will be able to do the electronic updates with in house staff. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The City has accepted a Grant with the FAA to cover 91.06% of the $520,684. ADOT Aeronautics will cover 4.47% ($25,104) with the City of Flagstaff covering the remaining 4.47% ($25,104). This project is budgeted in FY 2016 in account 221-07-222-3334-0-4421 in the amount of $600,000. |
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics 2) Provide a well-managed transportation system 3) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans 4) Improve effectiveness of notification, communication, and engagement with residents, neighborhoods and businesses and about City services, programs, policies, projects and developments 5) Improve the economic quality of life for Flagstaff through economic diversification, and by fostering jobs and programs that grow wages and revenues Regional Plan The Airport Master Plan is an extensive plan that will look to future needs of the City of Flagstaff in terms of growth, needs of the airport, the surrounding area, and the community. This will incorporate the current regulations of the City of Flagstaff as well as the future growth needs. We will have community involvement regarding this Master Plan and meetings will be set up for public participation. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
On September 1 2015 the City Council approved the FAA Airport Master Plan Update with AGIS and ALP grant agreement for this project. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
The grant for this project has been approved, the options are to approve this contract and continue with the Grant of disapprove and return the Grant. | |||||
Background/History: | |||||
In 2004 the Airport undertook the last Master Plan project which outlined key projects like the runway extension and the Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighter facility. The FAA recommends that the Master Plan be updated close to every five years or when projects list are close to completion. When the last Master Plan was completed the City was working to lengthen the runway to accommodate jet traffic. At that time team charters had to be bused to Phoenix to fly out because the runway was not long enough. There were less than half the amount of passengers at that time as is currently flying out of Flagstaff. We went from turbo-prop aircraft with 19 seats, to today we have 50 seat jets. With in the next two years we will see aircraft with 70+ seats which will add strain to our existing terminal and terminal parking. The last Master Plan list is almost exhausted. The direction of the airport needs to be redefined to better meet the public needs. | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
A formal solicitation was posted for this project as of August 30, 2015. The solicitation closed as of October 1, 2015 with a total of four firms supplying their Statement of Qualifications for this project. A panel of five evaluator's scored the proposals, one of which was from the City of Scottsdale airport. The other four were City of Flagstaff employees. After scoring the proposals, Team Presentations were set up with the two highest scoring firms. The presentations were held on December 18, 2015. At that time, we had a clear highest scoring firm by the name of Coffman & Associates. The City of Flagstaff was then tasked to have an independent estimate done per FAA regulations. A detailed scope of work and an estimated fee schedule was requested and obtained by Coffman & Associates. The fees were in line with the independent estimate previously done. In March 2016, it was decided to send the proposal to Mayor Nabours and City Council for approval of the contract. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
The approved grant (FAA and ADOT) will cover 95.53% of the total cost for this Airport Master Plan. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
This project will have members of the Regional Plan on the committee as well as key stakeholders and public to discuss the options. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
This project will involve public impute meetings to get feedback on ideas, projects and the future of the airport. It will also involve key stakeholders on a committee to guide the project plans. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Approve the contract for the Airport Master Plan with Updated Aeronautical Survey or not approve the contract. | |||||
Attachments: | Copy of Contract | ||||
Grant Provisions | |||||
Exhibit A | |||||
Exhibit C | |||||
Exhibit B | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
9.B.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Contract: Audit Services Contract with Clifton Larson Allen. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve contract with Clifton Larson Allen for Professional Audit Services to perform annual audits of the City's financial records for the years ended June 30, 2016 through June 30, 2019 at the annual fees as follows:
- June 30, 2016: $77,910
- June 30, 2017: $80,410
- June 30, 2018: $81,560
- June 30, 2019: $82,300
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
An annual audit is statutorily required by ARS 9-481. In addition, City Charter (Article VI, Section 5) requires that the City perform an annual financial audit each year. Furthermore, there is a Federal requirement to complete a Single Audit report if a non-federal entity expends $750,000 of more in federal financial assistance, which the City has received. Our contract with Eide Bailly expired with the completion of the audit for the year ending June 30, 2015. No further extensions are available. Per the procurement process, Clifton Larson Allen is not only the highest scoring firm, it also has the best pricing of all three of the short listed firms. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The proposal FY2017 budget is $73,240 for audit services fees in the General Fund in account 001-09-402-1314-1-4203 and an additional $8,200 in the Flagstaff Housing Authority accounts for total of $81,440. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Financial audit services does not fit in a specific Council or Regional Plan goal, but allows for overall support of the organization. This item is required by City Charter.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
None. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve the contract with Clifton Larson Allen 2) Choose one of the other five proposals submitted for the RFP. Cons-potential higher costs associated with the contract and risk of a formal protest from Clifton Larson Allen if we choose one of the other lower scoring proposals. 3) Do not approve any contract and conduct a new RFP process. Cons-Potential delay in audit service for FY2016. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
An annual audit is statutorily required by ARS 9-481. In addition, the City is required to perform an independent annual financial audit per City Charter Article VI, Section 5 which states: "Prior to the end of each fiscal year, the Council shall designate an independent Certified Public Accountant, who, as of the end of the fiscal year, shall make up an audit of accounts and other evidence of financial transactions of the City government, and shall submit a long-form report, including recommendations concerning policy and fiscal procedures, to the Council, and to the City Manager. Such accountant shall have no personal interest, direct or indirect, in the fiscal affairs of the City government or of any of its officers. The accountant shall, within specifications approved by the Council, post-audit the books and documents kept by the City, and any separate or subordinate accounts kept by any other office, department, or agency of the City government." In addition to financial audit, the City is Federally required to complete a Single Audit based on Federal standards. The City meets this requirement because it expends more than $750,000 in federal financial assistance. The City's Finance Section invited CPA firms to submit a written proposal in response to Request for Proposals (RFP) to provide audit services to perform annual audits of the City's financial records. The City is requiring CPA firms to perform an annual audit in accordance with:
1. Generally accepted auditing standards set forth by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), and the standards for financial audits set forth by the U. S. Government Accountability Office's (GAO) Government Auditing Standards (GAS).
2. The provisions of the Single Audit Act of 1984 and subsequent amendments, and the provisions of U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 2, Part 200, Subpart F - Audit Requirements.
3. United States Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Uniform Financial Reporting Standards (UFRS) Rule implementing requirements of United States 24 CFR part 5, subpart H.
4. State of Arizona Uniform Expenditure Reporting System (UERS) requirements mandated by A.R.S. §41-1279.07, with guidelines set forth by the Arizona Auditor General.
5. State of Arizona Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF) Expenditure requirements pursuant to A.R.S. §9-481.
6. State of Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Local Government Financial Test, 40CFR 258.74. 7. Minimum Accounting Standards for Arizona Courts (Part III, Guide for External Review by Auditors) every three years beginning with fiscal year ending June 30, 2016. 8. Federal Aviation Administration Passenger Facility Charge Audit Guide for Public Agencies. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The City's Purchasing Section conducted a formal competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) for solicitation number 2016-42, which was advertised on January 24, 2016. The RFP closed as of 3:00pm February 12, 2016. There were a total of seven (7) proposal responses. Based on the scoring results, a decision was made to "short-list" and advance the three (3) highest scoring Proposers (Clifton Larson Allen, Eide Bailly and Heinfeld Meech) to phase two (2) of the RFP process, which involved interview questions/presentations. Clifton Larson Allen aggregate score, which included Phase One (1)--written proposal response and phase two (2)--interview questions/presentation, was the highest scoring Proposer with 747 total points out of 840 total possible points and the evaluation team which consisted of 6 members (4 City Employees and 2 Audit Committee members) determined Clifton Larson Allen to be the most responsible and responsive Proposer whose offer is the most satisfactory and advantageous to the City based on the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP document as follows: Phase 1 1. Firm Expertise and Key Staff Experience (35 Points) 2. Specific Audit Approach (35 Points) 3. Pricing (20 Points) 4. Other Services, Exceptions and References (10 Points) Phase 2 1. Interview Questions/Presentations (40 Points) |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Involve: There were two members of the community involved in the RFP for Audit Services. They are also members of our Audit Committee. Inform |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Options would be to approve contract as it stands or not approve it. Alternatives would be to go with one of the other six firms. Final alternative would be to not approve highest scoring firm and begin another new RFP process to select another firm which would cause delays for the current audit year. |
|||||
Attachments: | Scoring Tabulation | ||||
Copy of Contract | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
9.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Contract: Citywide Professional On-call Consulting Services: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Engineering, Geotechnical and Survey. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Approve the fifteen (15) On-Call Professional Services contracts for the following firms and disciplines:
Architecture: Johnson Walzer Associates and Loven Contracting
Landscape Architecture: The WLB Group and Kimley-Horn
Engineering: Civil Design Engineers, Peak Engineering, Plateau Engineering, Shephard Wesnitzer Inc., Turner Engineering, The WLB Group and Woodson Engineering
Geotechnical: Speedie and Associates, and Western Technologies
Survey: Shephard Wesnitzer Inc. and Woodson Engineering
2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The On-call consulting services contracts allow for continued consolidation of the design and construction delivery schedules of City projects. Due to annual escalation in labor and material costs, compression of delivery schedules can play an important role in managing limited budgets. The term of the contracts for all disciplines is for three (3) consecutive years, with two (2) additional one year optional renewals thereafter. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
No immediate financial impact. Costs will be expended from budgets already approved and allocated to individual projects by Council. Each contractor's pricing schedule is on file with the Purchasing Division and will be incorporated as part of each contractor's contract. Pricing varies among contractors. |
|||||
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 |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Yes. In December 2010, council approved twenty-two (22) Professional On-Call Services contracts for the same disciplines. |
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The City of Flagstaff manages a significant number of capital projects, which span the spectrum of size and complexity from small improvement projects to multi-million dollar infrastructure projects. Over the past 5 years, Capital Improvements, Utilities, Flagstaff Metropolitan Planning Organization, and Public Works have awarded over thirty (30) task orders utilizing these contracts. Through the use of these contracts, all City departments were able to manage multi-project and work programs in a more time efficient manner. While the use of the previous Professional On-Call Services contracts proved to be a valuable tool, not all contracts were fully utilized. As a result, the number of contracts to be awarded in this solicitation was scaled back from 22 to 15 for better utilization. In September 2015, the City solicited a Requests for Qualifications (RSOQ) for On-Call Professional Consultant Services in five (5) discipline areas, Architecture; Landscape Architecture; Engineering; Geotechnical; and Surveying. On November 4, 2015, the City received a total of 59 statements from 53 respondents. An evaluation committee was formed consisting of six (6) members, including two members outside of City employment, all having experience working in or with these professional services. Due to the extremely large response, the committee spent four and a half (4-1/2) months, early November 2015 through the late March 2016, evaluating all proposals. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
On-Call Professional Service Contracts save time and money for all parties involved. The consultants are relieved of many hours of proposal preparation and interview time, along with related expenses. The City saves the cost of multiple legal advertisements, and the staff time and related expenses involved in individually advertising and selecting consultants for each separate project. On-Call Service Contracts are specifically addressed and authorized by the Arizona Revised Statues and they adhere to current City of Flagstaff procurement standards. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Scope of Work, schedules, and task-specific fee proposals for Task Order amendments will be formulated on an as needed basis. Task Order amendments associated with these contracts will be charged directly to specific projects and their individual budgets. All Task Order amendments will be reviewed and approved by Division and/or Department heads prior to execution. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
All projects undertaken by the City have a direct or indirect impact on the quality of life enjoyed by the citizens of Flagstaff. Utilization of On-Call Consultants offers the primary advantage of expedited project delivery that will bring the project to fruition for the community's benefit faster and with less total project costs. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
N/A | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Attachments: | Evaluation Scores | ||||
On-Call Services Contract | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration of Audited Financial Reports: Year ending June 30, 2015. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the FY 2015 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and approve the FY 2015 Single Audit Report (as reissued).
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
The City is required to perform an annual audit each year, pursuant to ARS 9-481 and the City Charter (Article VI, Section 5); this audit is commonly known as the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The CAFR is reviewed by an independent auditor to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free of material misstatement. In addition, the City also obtains an annual Single Audit as a condition of receiving federal assistance in excess of $300,000. An independent auditor performs the Single Audit. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
There is no financial impact to approving the City's Fiscal Year 2015 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) or the FY 2015 Single Audit. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Financial Reporting does not fit in a specific Council or Regional Plan goal, but allows for overall support of the organization. This item is required by City Code. | |||||
Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The City is required to perform an independent annual financial audit per City Charter Article VI, Section 5 which states: "Prior to the end of each fiscal year, the Council shall designate an independent Certified Public Accountant, who, as of the end of the fiscal year, shall make up an audit of accounts and other evidence of financial transactions of the City government, and shall submit a long-form report, including recommendations concerning policy and fiscal procedures, to the Council, and to the City Manager. Such accountant shall have no personal interest, direct or indirect, in the fiscal affairs of the City government or of any of its officers. The accountant shall, within specifications approved by the Council, post-audit the books and documents kept by the City, and any separate or subordinate accounts kept by any other office, department, or agency of the City government." In addition to financial audit, the City is required to complete a Single Audit because it receives more than $300,000 in federal assistance. For Fiscal Year 2016, the City received $750,000 in federal assistance. The City has hired Eide Bailly, LLC (the Auditors). The Auditors work directly with the Finance Staff to complete review of the City's financial data and internal controls. The financial reports are the responsibility of the City and are based on activity of the fiscal year. The CAFR is presented in accordance with all standards as defined by the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The Auditors are not responsible for reviewing every transaction for the fiscal year, however based on the standards the Auditors plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance that the statements are free of material misstatements. The Auditors prepare the Single Audit which is an independent assessment of City finances and includes a schedule of expenditures of federal fund awards. The City has established an Audit Committee to review the financial reports and findings (CAFR and the Single Audit). The committee discusses the information and makes a recommendation to Council to accept or reject the financial reports. The Audit Committee is represented by a City Councilmember, three citizens (one vacant), the City Manager, and the Management Services Director:
After this presentation City staff discussed the potential error on classification of net position with the Auditors. The Auditors recommended that we make the corrections and reissue the CAFR. Staff made the decision to reissue the CAFR. The discovery relates to the classification of restricted and unrestricted net assets on the governmental wide statement of net position. (Statement of Net Position is page 21 of the CAFR). With the implementation of GASB 68 (Pension Liability), for the first time the City had a negative unrestricted net position. It was unclear how to report this in relation to the restricted net position. Effects of this reclassified unrestricted net position deficit of $12,596,148 to an unrestricted net position deficit of $65,530,075 and resulting increase in restricted net position to $52,933,927. This change has no change or negative impact on the balance sheet of governmental fund statements or the proprietary fund statements. A second Audit Committee meeting occurred on April 5, 2016 and the following members were in attendance: David Cosper, Sharman Cawood, Josh Copley, and Rick Tadder. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The City has received an "unqualified opinion" from the Auditors, meaning the audit firm believes the financial statements are fairly presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. In the Communication to Mayor and City Council (attached) the audit firm states: there were no difficulties encountered in performing the audit and; there were no disagreements with management. The letter states there were two corrected misstatements and one uncorrected misstatement. Misstatements are noted when the Auditors have found items that may be incorrectly presented during the audit engagement. The first corrected misstatement related to accuracy of aggregation of financial data related to impaired capital assets and insurance proceeds for the Housing Authority. The second item is related to timely and accurately reporting of miscellaneous receivables. The uncorrected misstatement is related to the accruing of accounts payable in the incorrect reporting period. The uncorrected item is not deemed material to the City CAFR. In the Single Audit Report, three financial statement findings were noted. The first two relate to the corrected misstatements noted above. The third finding related to the discovery by City staff mentioned above. Due to findings on the FY 2013 reports, the City's Single Audit status does not qualify as a low risk auditee. As a result, this year's single audit covered a minimum of fifty percent of the federal expenditures. Since no material weaknesses were noted in the FY 2015 Single Audit, the City will qualify as a low risk auditee for the FY 2016 audit. We do not expect to have any negative impacts to our ability to submit for federal grants based on these findings. The Audit Committee unanimously approved the acceptance of the CAFR and Single Audit at the April 5, 2016 meeting. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
An annual audit is statutorily required by ARS 9-481. In addition, should the City not perform an annual audit of it financial statements and complete a Single Audit, the City could lose valuable grant funding. The amount of reimbursements of Federal Award reported for in Fiscal Year 2015 was $11.4 million. State and local grant funding was $1.9 million in Fiscal Year 2015. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Independent review of the City’s financial statements elevates the level of confidence that the City is reporting fairly, accurately, and within prescribed guidelines. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Involve: The community is directly involved through the participation on the Audit Committee. Inform: Any community member may review the most recent CAFR and Single Audit Report. The current and historical CAFR and Single Audit and SEFA are on file and available for public inspection in the following locations:
|
|||||
Attachments: | Council Communication | ||||
Memo | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.B.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Contract: Approve the renewal of our Workers' Compensation contract with Copperpoint Mutual Insurance (Workers Compensation Insurance Contract). | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the renewal of our Workers' Compensation contract with Copperpoint Mutual Insurance at an estimated annual cost of $730,000.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
Approval of the renewal of our Workers' Compensation coverage at a reduction of $50,000. No changes in coverage or insurance providers. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
By renewing our Workers' Compensation insurance coverage with CopperPoint insurance the City will save an estimated $50,000 this fiscal period. Since policy ending 6/30/14 we have saved over $700,000 dollars, cumulative, in our renewals. The estimated annual premium for 2016-2017 is less than the total paid during the 2005-2006 fiscal period. There has been no change in our insurance carrier or coverage. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Effective governance.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve 2) Request additional quotes 3) Self insure our Workers' Compensation program for the following fiscal period |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The City of Flagstaff is required to carry Workers' Compensation coverage per Arizona statute. The City is currently insured with Copperpoint Mutual, formally SCF of Arizona and have been for over ten years. The premium that the City pays is determined by several factors. They are; the rate per $100 of payroll as determined for Arizona by the National Council on Compensation and Insurance, our payroll by position type, our experience modification factor which is a multiplier that moves our premium up or down based on the City of Flagstaff's history of losses over a rolling three year period and our ability to negotiate a discount with our carrier if available. Over the last three years our employee injuries have been reduced by 50% while serious injuries are down over 80%. Because of this our multiplication factor has dropped from 1.18 times the rate in fiscal year 14 to .93 times the rate for fiscal year 17. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Because of the efforts of our employees, (who are the real risk managers for the City), and the subsequent reduction in injuries, we have been able to secure a reduction in each of our renewals over the last three years. Although our total payroll exposure has increased modestly and our rates per $100 have changed, our net savings over the last three years as compared to premium paid in FY 14 is $722,643. We anticipate continued savings in future renewals. As our losses become more predictable and our Risk culture improves we will look to self insure our Workers' Compensation program over the next two to five years. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform |
|||||
Attachments: | PowerPoint | ||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.C.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Contract: Approve the renewal of our Casualty insurance with Travelers Insurance and our Property coverage with AIG insurance. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Approve the renewal of our Casualty insurance with Travelers Insurance and our Property coverage with AIG insurance at a total estimated annual cost of $850,000.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
Approval of our Property and Casualty insurance programs at a savings of $25,000 for a total of $850,000. There are no changes in carriers, coverage or deductibles. This renewal is $25,000 less than last fiscal period and $375,000 less than budgeted for the 2013-2014 fiscal period. There is no change in deductible and no changes in carriers or coverage from last fiscal period. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
By renewing our Casualty coverage with Travelers insurance and our Property coverage with AIG the City will save an estimated annual premium expenditure of $25,000 over last fiscal period. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
Effective governance.
|
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
no | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve 2) Reject and request quotes 3) Self insure our Property and Casualty programs |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The City of Flagstaff carries insurance to protect the City from unexpected financial loss. Main coverage areas include auto, general liability, excess liability ($20 million), property coverage, crime, cyber, airport liability in the amount of $40 million, flood and specific properties, employers liability, errors and omission coverage, and other supplemental coverages as appropriate. Our current carrier for most lines of coverage is Travelers Insurance. For our property coverage, we are insured with AIG. The City has a $75,000 self insured retention on both general and auto liability claims. This self insured retention applies to both legal fees incurred as well as settlement amounts. Recent adverse claim activity from a January 2011 claim, is likely to cause a modest increase in the general liability portion of our renewal in FY 2018. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
Over the last three renewal periods we have saved $1,048,279 from what we paid in fiscal 14 for these coverage's. We anticipate reviewing the appropriateness of our self insured retention, currently $75,000, and a potential recommendation for an increase over the next two to four years. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | AIG Policy | ||||
Liability policy | |||||
Airport policy | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.D.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Consideration and Approval of Contract: Sunnyside Phase V-C Improvement Project. (Approval of a road-construction contract in Sunnyside). | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Approve the construction contract with RTR Paving and Resurfacing, Inc. in the amount of $615,077.70 with a contract period of 135 calendar days; 2) Approve a contract allowance of $60,000 to cover the potential costs associated with unanticipated or additional items of work; 3) Authorize Change Order Authority for the City Manager in the amount of $61,508 (10% of the contract amount); 4) Authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents. |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
Award of this contract to RTR Paving and Resurfacing, Inc. will provide an agreement for the construction services for the Sunnyside Phase V-C Improvement Project. The scope of this project will include five (5) blocks of the Sunnyside Neighborhood (Attachment 1). Currently, these streets have deteriorated road surfaces, an absence of sidewalks, curb and gutter, and inadequate stormwater drainage. Roadways included in this project will be completely reconstructed. Improvements within the scope of this project will tie into the adjacent street improvements which have already been completed. This project is scheduled in the Capital Five-Year Plan and is funded by Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) for FY2016. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The project has a total FY2016 budget appropriation of $825,000 in account 040-06-162-3078-6. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
3) Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics
6) Provide a well-managed transportation system |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The Council adopted the FY2016 budget at the 16 June 2015 Council meeting and this appropriation was included in said budget. City Council has previously authorized completed Sunnyside improvement phases. |
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Sunnyside Neighborhood has undergone numerous phases of public improvements that included construction of concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter, parkway and driveway construction, asphalt street reconstruction, and underground utility upgrades. Phase V-C will be funded as a result of accumulated funds from lot sales at the Flagstaff Auto Park. Attachment 1 illustrates the Phase V-C project area. The project area is located in the south central portion of the Sunnyside Neighborhood and is bound to the north by Third Avenue, to the south by First Avenue, to the east by East Street, and to the west by Izabel Street. The project scope includes construction of ADA-accessible concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter, parkways and driveways, asphalt street reconstruction, and stormwater catch basins on Third Avenue to mitigate localized surface drainage issues and improve conveyance of storm drainage through the neighborhood. On March 3, 2016, staff posted and Invitation for Bids (IFB) for construction services. The bid was also advertised in the local newspaper on March 6th and March 13th. On March 24, 2016 (due date), five bids were received and opened. After review of all bids received, RTR Paving & Resurfacing's bid was deemed to be the lowest responsive and responsible. Bids received are as followed: RTR Paving & Resurfacing: $615,077.70 Eagle Mountain Construction: $661,519.25 Kinney Construction Services: $671,195.00 Standard Construction Company: $790,776.25 Woodruff Construction: $828,913.00 |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Design and construction of the Phase V-C improvements will provide a wide range of public improvements in an otherwise unimproved area of the Sunnyside Neighborhood. Within the project area there are no walkable sidewalks to separate pedestrians from vehicular traffic, localized drainage issues which effect property owners, and unimproved driveway ramps and degraded asphalt roadway. The contract scope of services stipulates the contract duration for construction is 135 days. Construction is programmed for summer 2016. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
The community benefits of this project include:
|
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Community involvement has been multi-faceted. Nearly all on-site property owners have had at least one discussion with the Capital Improvement Project Manager regarding the project. Additionally, Capital Improvement Staff has presented to the Sunnyside Neighborhood Association the scope and objectives of the project. The Capital Improvement Project Manager has and will continue to work alongside franchise utilities to coordinate relocations and relevant project workings. |
|||||
Attachments: | Vicinity Map | ||||
Construction Contract | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.E.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Update on Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) Re: Naval Observatory Flagstaff Station and Camp Navajo and a request to appoint two Council members to serve on the Policy Committee. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Receive and discuss information regarding the Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) and appoint two Councilmembers to serve on the JLUS Policy Committee.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
Coconino County will be the local sponsor of a Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) for the US Naval Observatory and Camp Navajo. As stated in information provided by the Navy and the Department of Defense, the purpose of a JLUS is to prevent incompatible uses surrounding military installations that may interfere with the ability to complete the mission of the facility and to limit impacts of the installation on surrounding property owners. The results of a JLUS could have great value in informing what uses are appropriate within activity centers located on the west side of town, within closer proximity to the Naval Observatory. The Flagstaff Regional Plan calls for completing specific plans for each activity center. It is unknown if the results of the JLUS will recommend removing exiting development rights on properties in the area. It is staff's understanding that the Naval Observatory initiated the application with the support of the County as project sponsor. A draft scope of work has been prepared by Coconino County and is attached to this report. Deputy County Manager Neal Young is the current project manager. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
At this time no funding is being requested. While a local match for the grant to fund the JLUS is required, it is anticipated that it will be provided using in-kind services. Staff time spent working on the JLUS can be provided as the local match. | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS 7) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans 9) Improve the economic quality of life for Flagstaff through economic diversification, and by fostering jobs and programs that grow wages and revenues REGIONAL PLAN: Policy LU.18.1. Design activity centers and corridors appropriate to and within the context of each area type: urban, suburban, or rural. Policy LU.18.9. Plan activity centers and corridors appropriate to their respective regional or neighborhood scale. |
|||||
Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
No. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
City Council can choose not to participate in the JLUS and direct staff accordingly. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform | |||||
Attachments: | Draft JLUS Scope | ||||
JLUS Notes & Timeline | |||||
PowerPoint | |||||
DOD Presentation | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
10.F.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Development Block Grant Program: 1) Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2016-15: A resolution approving the City of Flagstaff's 2016 -2020 Consolidated Plan and authorizing its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 2) Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2016-16: A resolution approving the City of Flagstaff's 2016 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and authorizing its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 3) Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2016-17: A resolution approving the City of Flagstaff's 2016/2017 Annual Action Plan and authorizing its submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1) Read Resolution No. 2016-15 by title only
2) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2016-15 (if approved above) 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-15 4) Read Resolution No. 2016-16 by title only
5) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2016-16 (if approved above) 6) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-16 7) Read Resolution No. 2016-17 by title only
8) City Clerk reads Resolution No. 2016-17 (if approved above) 9) Adopt Resolution No. 2016-17 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Executive Summary: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This staff summary is for the approval of three separate plans that need to be submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as part of the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG). All three plans are due to HUD on May 15, 2016 and are required in order for the City of Flagstaff to maintain its compliance with federal CDBG regulations. Timely submission of these plans will enable the City to continue its annual entitlement allocation of CDBG funding. Resolution No. 2016-15 The FY 2016-2020 Consolidated Plan (Con Plan) functions as a community guiding document to help achieve HUD’s primary objective and national objectives. Resolution No. 2016-16 The Analysis of Impediments to Further Fair Housing Choice (AI) reviews current information and data available from a number of sources, identifies current impediments to fair housing in the City of Flagstaff, evaluates the efficacy of the 2011 Plan of Action and develops a new plan that takes appropriate steps to overcome the effects of any impediments identified to further fair housing choice and maintains records reflecting the actions taken. Resolution No. 2016-17 The Annual Action Plan (AA Plan) is a document that specifies how the 2016/2017 annual allocation of CDBG funds will be spent. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Financial Impact: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Approval of the above resolutions is critical to the City of Flagstaff receiving its annual CDBG entitlement allocation. The 2016/2017 CDBG allocation is $599,050, an increase of $19,453 from last year. In addition, the City of Flagstaff is able to combine program income and reallocated funds from previous years to increase the funds available for allocation. Total program income and reallocated funds equals $41,743 for a grand total of $640,793 available for the 2016/2017 program year, through the Annual Action Plan process. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 4) Explore and adopt policies to lower the costs associated with housing to the end user 10) Support and assist the most vulnerable REGIONAL PLAN: Goal NH.1. Foster and maintain healthy and diverse urban, suburban, and rural neighborhoods in the Flagstaff region. • Policy NH.1.1. Preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods. Goal NH.3. Make available a variety of housing types at different price points, to provide housing opportunities for all economic sectors. • Policy NH.3.1. Provide a variety of housing types throughout the City and region, including purchase and rental options, to expand the choices available to meet the financial and lifestyle needs of our diverse population. • Policy NH.3.3. Increase the availability of affordable housing for very low-income persons, through innovative and effective funding mechanisms. Goal NH.4. All housing is safe and sanitary. • Policy NH.4.1. Expand the availability of affordable housing throughout the region by preserving existing housing, including housing for very low-income persons. Policy NH.4.2. Reduce substandard housing units by conserving and rehabilitating existing housing stock to minimize impacts on existing residents. • Policy NH.4.3.Address accessibility issues and other housing barriers to persons with disabilities or special needs. • Policy NH.4.4. Encourage green practices in housing construction and rehabilitation that support durable, healthy, and energy efficient homes. • Policy NH.4.5. Renovate the existing housing stock to conserve energy and reduce utility and maintenance costs for owners and occupants. • Policy NH.4.6. Consider and integrate public transportation when possible in planning housing developments, to help reduce a household’s transportation costs and minimize impact on the community’s roads and transportation system. • Policy NH.4.7. Enforce compliance with fair housing laws. Goal NH.5. Eliminate homelessness. • Policy NH.5.1. Provide adequate resources for families with children experiencing homelessness. • Policy NH.5.2. Provide adequate resources for individuals experiencing homelessness. • Policy NH.5.3. Support and expand programs that prevent homelessness. • Policy NH.5.4. Make transitional housing resources available to populations experiencing homelessness. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
None | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options and Alternatives: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A) Approve Resolution Nos. 2016-15, 2016-16 and 2016-17 and authorize the submission of the Con Plan, AI and the AA Pan to HUD. B) Modify one or all Resolution Nos. 2016-15, 2016-16 and 2016-17 and authorize the submission to HUD. C) Not approve Resolution Nos. 2016-15, 2016-16 and 2016-17 and risk losing future CDBG allocations. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Background/History: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In order to receive CDBG funding, the City must complete and submit to HUD three required plans by May 15, 2016.
Housing staff are responsible for determining whether a proposed activity is eligible, conducting a risk assessment of the project and applying agency. Federal funds require administrative knowledge and capacity to ensure compliant and timely expenditure of funds. Additionally, a committee comprised of three community representatives (one non-profit representative, one neighborhood association leader, and one external grants representative) and four City staff met to review the external proposals and rank them by consensus. Rankings are created primarily to serve as a risk and benefit assessment and are the guiding input of the staff recommendations forwarded to City Council. Below is a list of the proposals in ranking order. The proposals are divided between Housing and Public Service categories as they have two separate funding limits and different criteria. Internal City of Flagstaff proposals are presented to meet City Council priorities or other unmet needs in the community and are not ranked (NR) competitively with the other proposals as the City would administer these projects directly. A comprehensive Proposal Book that includes each of the below proposals was distributed to Council on March 25, 2016.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Key Considerations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In order to receive CDBG funding, the City must complete a Con Plan every five years. The City’s Con Plan for HUD Program Years 2016 – 2020 was recently completed. In addition to the 5-year Con Plan, the City must complete an AA Plan that describes how CDBG funds will be used in the coming year. As part of the 5-year Con Plan and AA Plans, the City certifies it will affirmatively further fair housing. As part of this certification, the City must complete an AI, take appropriate actions to overcome the effects of any impediments identified through the analysis, and maintain records reflecting the actions taken. Resolution No. 2016-15 - Consolidated Plan (Con Plan) The creation of the Con Plan is an extensive process involving public and stakeholder input (gathered through surveys, public meetings and a 45 day public comment period), community needs assessments and a housing market analysis. The data outlined in the Con Plan helps determine the relative priority of activities and the populations that will be served in the coming years. HUD allows two priority designations – high and low. Assignment of priority does not reflect a lack of need for any particular population or activity; it merely identifies those conditions that are most likely to be addressed with limited CDBG funding.
that will be targeted to special populations are indicated. The table is designed to meet HUD requirements.
Resolution No. 2016-16 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) Similar to the Con Plan, the AI is created utilizing substantial community involvement (stakeholder surveys, phone interviews and a public comment process). The purpose of the AI is to identify legitimate fair housing problems (impediments) faced by people seeking housing in Flagstaff. The AI reviews current information and data available from a number of sources, identifies current impediments to fair housing in the City of Flagstaff, evaluates the efficacy of the 2011 Plan of Action and develops a new Plan of Action to address current impediments. The City’s goals for the 2016 AI include:
HUD has two funding caps with regard to the use of CDBG funds. Public Service expenditures are capped at 15% of the allocation and Program Administration is capped at 20% of the allocation. The rest of the available funding can be spent on Housing/Economic Development Activities. Public Service Funding Recommendation Federal CDBG regulations do not allow more than 15% of funds to be spent on Public Service Activities; $94,600 for Program Year 16/17. Below are the funding recommendations for the Public Service Category:
Housing Funding Recommendation Based on the above Public Service recommendations, there is $420,133 in CDBG funds available for Housing Activities. Below are the funding recommendations for the Housing Category:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The City expects to receive between $550,000 to $700,000 in CDBG funding during each of the next five years. The attached Resolution 2016-17 is reflective of the recommendations listed above. The 2016/2017 CDBG recommendations are based on a total of $640,793 in available funding and the City of Flagstaff's estimated indirect rate for 2016/2017 of 10%.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CDBG funds, leveraged with other private and public funds over the past 15 years, have resulted in benefits to thousands of Flagstaff residents. In program year 2014-2015, Flagstaff leveraged $694,849.61 in CDBG expenditures with $4,683,301.00 in other private or public funds. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Community Involvement: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
All three plans offer extensive community involvement and collaboration ranging from public meetings and public comment periods to telephone and online surveys.
Resolution 2016-15 - Consolidated Plan (Con Plan) The Housing Section met with the Coconino County Continuum of Care, which leads efforts to address homelessness for the Rural Continuum of Care managed by the Arizona Department of Housing. Two public consultation meetings took place to seek Con Plan input into 1) community needs and 2) proposed goals, activities and objectives. An online survey was conducted to secure input into community needs and priorities; 63 responses were received. Resolution 2016-16 - Analysis of Impediments to Further Fair Housing (AI) A public forum was conducted in conjunction with the Southwest Fair Housing Council with the purposes of: 1) providing fair housing education, 2) identifying fair housing concerns and issues, and 3) identifying solutions to address fair housing concerns in the City of Flagstaff. In addition, during the months of November and December 2015, a resident survey was conducted with 159 respondents. Interviews were conducted with 6 individuals working in the housing and related industries in Flagstaff and 13 participants in the Flagstaff Leadership Program. Both the survey and the interviews focused on gathering information to help identify possible fair housing impediments and ways to address them. Resolution 2016-17 Annual Action Plan (AA) The AA Plan process had three public meetings, a ranking committee with citizens and city staff, and a public comment period for community involvement. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A) Approve any or all of the Resolution Nos. 2016-15, 2016-16 and 2016-17 and authorize the submission of the Consolidated Plan, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Annual Action Plan to HUD.
B) Modify any or all of the Resolution Nos. 2016-15, 2016-16 and 2016-17. C) Not approve any or all of the Resolution Nos. 2016-15, 2016-16 and 2016-17. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Attachments: | Consolidated Plan Executive Summary | ||||
Executive Summary Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice | |||||
April 12 Power Point Presentation to Council | |||||
Resolution 2016-15 | |||||
Resolution 2016-16 | |||||
Resolution 2016-17 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.1.a.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-20: 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 Statutes, by annexing certain land totaling approximately 640.51 acres located in Section 12, Township 21 North, Range 6 East, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, and establishing city zoning for said land as Public Open Space (POS) for 640.51 acres. (Observatory Mesa Annexation) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-20 by title only for the final time |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
An annexation request of approximately 640.51 acres, which is part of the Observatory Mesa open space owned by the City of Flagstaff. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans REGIONAL PLAN: LU.7.2 Require unincorporated properties to be annexed prior to the provision of City services, or that a pre-annexation agreement is executed when deemed appropriate. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Approve the ordinance as proposed. 2. Approve the ordinance with conditions. 3. Deny the ordinance. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Applicant, the City of Flagstaff Sustainability Program, on behalf of the property owner, the City of Flagstaff, is requesting an annexation of 640.51 acres, which is a part of Observatory Mesa. With funding from the 2004 voter approved Open Space bond, the City of Flagstaff acquired Observatory Mesa in November 2013 for the express purpose of preserving its unique recreational, educational and natural resources. This annexation is the first of a three-step process. The second being a Regional Plan Amendment to change the Future Growth Illustration (Maps 21 and 22) from Area in White/State Land to Parks/Open Space. The third is a Zoning Map Amendment to add the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone. Both amendment applications are being processed concurrently with this application but will not become effective until after the annexation has been completed. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
State statutes only allow the City to adopt a zoning classification that permits densities and intensities no greater than those permitted by the County immediately before the annexation. Currently the property is zoned Open Space and Conservation (OS) in the County so the property will come into the City in the Public Open Space (POS) zone. A Regional Plan Amendment application to change the current designation on Maps 21 and 22 from Area in White/State Land to Parks/Open Space is proposed to support the existing zoning on the property as well as update ownership and city limits. A Zoning Map Amendment application to add the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone is proposed to further the preservation of the property and its resources. The Regional Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment applications will be considered subsequent to review of the annexation application. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and considerations related to this Annexation request are addressed in the attached Planning & Zoning Commission staff report date February 12, 2016. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate, Empower Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council are conducted in conjunction with requests for annexation. In accordance with State statute, notice of the public hearing was provided by placing an ad in the Daily Sun, posting notices on the property, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 600 feet of the site. The notices were also provided to the County Recorder, County Assessor, County Community Development Department, and the Chair of the Board of Supervisors. All property owners within 600-feet of this site were notified via mail of the Annexation, Regional Plan, and Zoning Map Amendments and asked to attend the Open Space Commission meeting on October 22, 2015. Four individuals spoke at this meeting but none referenced any concerns with Observatory Mesa. |
|||||
Attachments: | Application & Narrative | ||||
Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report | |||||
Annexation Legal Description | |||||
Ord. 2016-20 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.1.b.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-21: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 1610.69 acres of real property located on Observatory Mesa, from Rural Residential ("RR") to Public Open Space ("POS"), and approximately 2.0 acres from Rural Residential ("RR") to Public Facility ("PF") and to apply the Resource Protection Overlay ("RPO") to approximately 640.51 acres. (Observatory Mesa Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-21 by title only for the final time |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
A Zoning Map Amendment request to rezone approximately 1610.69 acres located on Observatory Mesa from Rural Residential (RR) to Public Open Space (POS), approximately 2.00 acres from Rural Residential (RR) to Public Facility (PF) and to apply the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) to approximately 640.51 acres. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None
|
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics 2) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans 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.7. Give special consideration to environmentally sensitive lands in the development design and review process. 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 CC.1. Reflect and respect the region’s natural setting and dramatic views in the built environment. 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: | |||||
The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Approve the ordinance with the proposed condition. 2. Approve the ordinance with no conditions, additional conditions or modified conditions. 3. Deny the ordinance. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Applicant, the City of Flagstaff Sustainability Program, on behalf of the property owner, the City of Flagstaff, is requesting a Zoning Map amendment to rezone approximately 1610.69 acres known as Observatory Mesa to the Public Open Space (POS), approximately 2.00 acres to Public Facility (PF) and add the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone to approximately 640.51. An overlay zone is a special zoning district placed over an existing zoning district, part of a district, or a combination of districts. Overlay zones build on the underlying zoning, by establishing additional requirements. In this case, the overlay zone would be in addition to the Public Open Space (POS) zone. Approximately 1612.69 acres of Observatory Mesa already have the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone applied. With funding from the 2004 voter approved Open Space bond, the City of Flagstaff acquired Observatory mesa in November 2013 for the express purpose of preserving its unique recreational, educational, and natural resources. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The primary purpose of this Zoning Map Amendment is to add layers of protection to Observatory Mesa. The majority of the properties will be zoned and regulated under the Public Open Space (POS) zoning, which is intended to be applied to areas of the City that are appropriate for designation as public open space to allow for resource protection and passive recreation uses. The two acres that will be rezoned to Public Facility (PF) currently consists of a tank farm maintained by the Utilities Division, which would not be a permitted use in the Public Open Space (POS) zone. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and considerations related to this Annexation request are addressed in the attached Planning & Zoning Commission staff report date February 12, 2016. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate, Empower Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council are conducted in conjunction with requests for Zoning Map Amendment. In accordance with State statute, notice of the public hearing was provided by placing an ad in the Daily Sun, posting notices on the property, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 600 feet of the site. All property owners within 600-feet of this site were notified via mail of the zoning map amendment and annexation and asked to attend the Open Space Commission meeting on October 22, 2015. |
|||||
Attachments: | Planning & Zoning Commission Report | ||||
Observatory Mesa ZMA Application | |||||
FRP 2030 Goals & Policies | |||||
Open Space Commission Minutes | |||||
Ord. 2016-21 | |||||
Exhibit A | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.2.a.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-18: 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 Statutes, by annexing certain land totaling approximately 77.8 acres located in Section 4, Township 21 North, Range 8 East, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, and establishing no city zoning for said land. (Picture Canyon Annexation) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-18 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-18 by title for the final time (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-18 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
An annexation request of approximately 77.8 acres currently part of the Picture Canyon Natural Preserve And Archeological Park owned by the City of Flagstaff. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans REGIONAL PLAN: LU.7.2 - Require unincorporated properties to be annexed prior to the provision of City services, or that a pre-annexation agreement is executed when deemed appropriate. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Approve the ordinance as proposed 2. Approve the ordinance with no conditions, additional conditions or modified conditions 3. Deny the ordinance |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Applicant, the City of Flagstaff Sustainability Program, on behalf of the property owner, the City of Flagstaff, is requesting an annexation of 77.8 acres, which is a part of the Picture Canyon Preserve and Archeological Park. With funding from the 2004 voter approved Open Space bond and a 2012 Growing Smarter Grant, the City of Flagstaff acquired Picture Canyon in October 2012 for the express purpose of preserving its unique historical, cultural, archeological, recreational, and educational resources. The canyon is an ecologically diverse riparian corridor and has a variety of native trees and plants. The area has many archeological resources with existing logging railroad features on the property eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
State statutes only allow the City to adopt a zoning classification that permits densities and intensities no greater than those permitted by the County immediately before the annexation. Currently the property is not zoned in the County so the property will come into the City with no zoning designation. A Zoning Map Amendment application to zone the parcel to Public Open Space (POS) zone with the Landmarks Overlay (LO) zone, Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone and Rural Floodplain designation is proposed to further the preservation of the property and its resources. The Zoning Map Amendment application will be considered subsequent to review of the annexation application. On February 24, 2016, the Planning & Zoning Commission concluded their review of the proposed annexation with a recommendation for approval, by a unanimous vote. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and considerations related to this Annexation request are addressed in the attached Planning & Zoning Commission staff report dated February 12, 2016. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate, Empower Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council are conducted in conjunction with requests for annexation. In accordance with State statute, notice of the public hearing was provided by placing an ad in the Daily Sun, posting notices on the property, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 600 feet of the site. The notices were also provided to the County Recorder, County Assessor, County Community Development Department and the Chair of the Board of Supervisors. All property owners within 600-feet of this site were notified via mail of the zoning map amendment and annexation and asked to attend the Open Space Commission meeting on October 22, 2015. One individual inquired about these applications affecting the management plans for Picture Canyon. |
|||||
Attachments: | Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report | ||||
Picture Canyon Application and Narrative | |||||
Picture Canyon Legal Description | |||||
County Zoning Letter | |||||
Ord. 2016-18 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.2.b.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-19: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 477.8 acres of real property known as Picture Canyon, from No Zoning (County) and Rural Residential (RR) to Public Open Space (POS), and to apply the Landmarks Overlay (LO), the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) and the Rural Floodplain Designation to approximately 77.8 acres. (Picture Canyon Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-19 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-19 by title for the final time (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-19 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
A Zoning Map Amendment request to rezone approximately 477.8 acres located in Section 4, Township 21 North, Range 8 East from No Zoning (County) and Rural Residential (RR) to Public Open Space (POS) and to apply the Landmarks Overlay (LO) Zone, the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) Zone, and the Rural Floodplain designation to 77.8. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans REGIONAL PLAN: 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 CC.2. Preserve, restore, and rehabilitate heritage resources to better appreciate our culture. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1. Approve the ordinance as proposed 2. Approve the ordinance with conditions 3. Deny the ordinance |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Applicant, the City of Flagstaff Sustainability Program, on behalf of the property owner, the City of Flagstaff, is requesting a Zoning Map amendment to rezone approximately 477.8 acres known as the Picture Canyon Preserve and Archeological Park to the Public Open Space (POS) zone and apply the Landmarks Overlay (LO) zone, Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone and the Rural Floodplain designation to 77.8 acres currently located in Coconino County. An overlay zone is a special zoning district placed over an existing zoning district, part of a district, or a combination of districts. Overlay zones build on the underlying zoning, by establishing additional requirements. In this case, the overlay zones would be in addition to the proposed Public Open Space (POS) zone. The 400 acres currently located within the city limits already has the Landmark Overlay (LO) zone, Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zones and Rural Floodplain designation applied. With funding from the 2004 voter approved Open Space bond and a 2012 Growing Smarter Grant, the City of Flagstaff acquired Picture Canyon in October 2012 for the express purpose of preserving its unique historical, cultural, archeological, recreational, and educational resources. The canyon is an ecologically diverse riparian corridor and has a variety of native trees and plants. The area has many archeological resources which have been documented in a 2012 Archeological Survey by Northland Research, Inc. Existing logging railroad features on the property appear to be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places which is sufficient for designation to the Landmarks Overlay (LO) zone. At its meeting of February 17, 2016 the City’s Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed this proposal and unanimously recommended that the City Council approve this rezoning request. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The primary purpose of this Zoning Map Amendment is to add layers of protection to the Picture Canyon Preserve and Archeological Park. Both properties will be zoned and regulated under the Public Open Space zoning which is intended to be applied to areas of the City that are appropriate for designation as public open space to allow for resource protection and passive recreation uses. The Landmark Overlay zone will make the property subject to the Landmark Design Review Overlay District Design Standards and Guidelines and design review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. The Resource Protection Overlay provides additional standards for the protection of natural resources, including floodplains, steep slopes, and forest. The Rural Floodplain designation on the Rio de Flag floodplain boundaries further adds a level of protection to this property and supports the City of Flagstaff’s Community Rating System (CRS) ranking, which helps to lower flood insurance rates for everyone in the city. On February 24, 2016, the Planning & Zoning Commission concluded their review of the proposed zoning map amendment with a recommendation for approval, by a unanimous vote. |
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and considerations related to this Annexation request are addressed in the attached Planning & Zoning Commission staff report dated February 12, 2016. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate, Empower Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council are conducted in conjunction with requests for Zoning Map Amendment. In accordance with State statute, notice of the public hearing was provided by placing an ad in the Daily Sun, posting notices on the property, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 600 feet of the site. All property owners within 600-feet of this site were notified via mail of the zoning map amendment and annexation and asked to attend the Open Space Commission meeting on October 22, 2015. One individual inquired about these applications affecting the management plans for Picture Canyon. |
|||||
Attachments: | Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report | ||||
Application | |||||
Picture Canyon Zoning Map 5 | |||||
Picture Canyon Zoning Map 6 | |||||
County Zoning Letter | |||||
Picture Canyon HPC Report | |||||
Open Space Commission Minutes | |||||
FRP 2030 Goals & Policies | |||||
Zoning Notice | |||||
Ordinance No. 2016-19 Exhibit A | |||||
Ord. 2016-19 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.3.a.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-16: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 26.03 acres of real property located at the northeast corner of Fir Avenue and North San Francisco Street, from Single Family Residential (R1) and Public Facility (PF) to Public Open Space (POS), and to apply the Rural Floodplain Designation. (Buffalo Park West Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-16 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-16 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-16 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
A zoning Map amendment request to rezone approximately 26.03 acres located north of Fir Avenue along San Francisco Street from the Single Family Residential (R1) and Public Facility (PF) zones to Public Open Space (POS). | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics 2) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans REGIONAL PLAN: Goal E&C.6. Protect, restore, and improve ecosystem health and maintain native plant and animal community diversity across all land ownership in the Flagstaff region. 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 WR.6. Protect, preserve, and improve the quality of surface water, groundwater, and reclaimed water in the region. 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: | |||||
This proposed rezoning would enact a prior dedication set forth in City of Flagstaff Ordinance No. 2014-23. The dedication states: “The portion of real property owned by the City of Flagstaff…is hereby set aside, preserved, and dedicated to the public for passive park purposes to be included in the immediately adjacent Buffalo Park.” Rezoning the property “to the zoning best reflective of the dedication of the property as a public park” was identified as a secondary enactment of the Ordinance. The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. |
|||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Options and Alternatives: 1) Approve the ordinance with the proposed conditions 2) Approve the ordinance with the proposed conditions, additional conditions, or modified conditions. 3) Deny the ordinance based on the required findings in Section 10-20.50.040(F)(1)(a) of the Flagstaff Zoning Code |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Applicant, the City of Flagstaff Recreation Department, on behalf of the property owner, the City of Flagstaff, is requesting a Zoning Map amendment to rezone approximately 26.03 acres to the Public Open Space (POS) zone with the Rural Floodplain designation. A Public Open Space (POS) designation would allow the expansion of an existing city park with passive recreational uses. The Rural Floodplain designation would exist along with the proposed Public Open Space (POS) zone, and prohibits certain development within the identified floodway and floodplain. Attached to this report is a map of the FEMA-recognized floodway and floodplain across the parcel, with the existing water transmission lines shown in the floodway. In addition, the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) zone currently applies to this parcel, and will be carried over with this rezoning application. As previously stated, the primary purpose of this rezoning is to enact a prior dedication as stated in City of Flagstaff Ordinance No. 2014-23. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
All proposed amendments shall be evaluated as to whether the application is consistent with and conforms to the goals of the General Plan and any applicable specific plans; and the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City of Flagstaff (the “City”) and will add to the public good as described in the General Plan; and the affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, shape, size, operating characteristics, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, public services, and utilities to ensure that the requested zone designation and the proposed or anticipated uses and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located. If the application is not consistent with the General Plan and any other applicable specific plan, the applicable plan must be amended in compliance with the procedures established in Chapter 11-10 of the City Code (Title 11: General Plans and Subdivisions) prior to considering the proposed amendment. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
None | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and considerations related to this Zoning Map amendment are addressed in the attached Planning and Zoning Commission staff report dated February 19, 2016. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
All property owners within 600-feet of this site were notified via mail of the zoning map amendment and asked to attend the October 19, 2015 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. Additionally, a notice was run in the Daily Sun, which discussed the zoning map amendment and identified the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting as a venue for discussion. The Commission did not meet quorum for their advertised meeting, but a public meeting for the rezoning was still held with the applicant and other city staff present. One member of the public attended the meeting to receive clarification on the Zoning Map amendment for this property. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
None | |||||
Attachments: | PZ Staff Report | ||||
Application | |||||
Zoning Map | |||||
Floodway Utilities Map | |||||
Public Notice | |||||
Exhibit A | |||||
Ord. 2016-16 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.4.a.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-15: An ordinance of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 1.07 acres of real property located at 805 West Clay Avenue, from Highway Commercial (HC) to Public Facility (PF). (Guadalupe Park Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-15 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-15 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-15 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
A Zoning Map amendment request to rezone approximately 1.07 acres located at 805 West Clay Avenue from Highway Commercial (HC) to Public Facility (PF). | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics 2) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans REGIONAL PLAN: Goal REC.1. Maintain and grow the region’s healthy system of convenient and accessible parks, recreation facilities, and trails. Goal NH.1. Foster and maintain healthy and diverse urban, suburban, and rural neighborhoods in the Flagstaff region. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
This is an action item from the Plaza Vieja Neighborhood Plan, adopted by Council in October 2015 (Resolution 2015-35). The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Options and Alternatives: 1) Approve the ordinance as proposed 2) Approve the ordinance with conditions 3) Deny the ordinance based on the required findings in Section 10-20.50.040(F)(1)(a) of the Flagstaff Zoning Code |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Applicant, the City of Flagstaff Parks and Recreation Department, on behalf of the property owner, the City of Flagstaff, is requesting a Zoning Map amendment to rezone approximately 1.07 acres to the Public Facility (PF) zone. A Public Facility (PF) designation would better align with the site’s existing and anticipated future use as a city park. The primary intention of this rezoning case is to carry forward an implementation strategy set forth in the Specific Plan to rezone both parks located in the neighborhood’s Transition Area. This rezoning case supports a vision of neighborhood preservation and enhancement of parks as stated in the La Plaza Neighborhood Specific Plan. | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
All proposed amendments shall be evaluated as to whether the application is consistent with and conforms to the goals of the General Plan and any applicable specific plans; and the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City of Flagstaff (the “City”) and will add to the public good as described in the General Plan; and the affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, shape, size, operating characteristics, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, public services, and utilities to ensure that the requested zone designation and the proposed or anticipated uses and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located. If the application is not consistent with the General Plan and any other applicable specific plan, the applicable plan must be amended in compliance with the procedures established in Chapter 11-10 of the City Code (Title 11: General Plans and Subdivisions) prior to considering the proposed amendment. |
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
None | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and considerations related to this Zoning Map amendment request are addressed in the attached Planning and Zoning Commission staff report dated February 19, 2016. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
All property owners within 600-feet of this site were notified via mail of the zoning map amendment and asked to attend the October 19, 2015 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. Additionally, a notice was run in the Daily Sun, which discussed the zoning map amendment and identified the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting as a venue for discussion. The Commission did not meet quorum for their advertised meeting, but a public meeting for the rezoning was still held with the applicant and other city staff present. No members of the public inquired about the rezoning of the property. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
None | |||||
Attachments: | PZ Staff Report | ||||
Application | |||||
Current Zoning Map | |||||
Public Notice | |||||
LPVNA Letter | |||||
Exhibit A | |||||
Ord. 2016-15 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.A.5.a.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-17: An ordinance of the City of Flagstaff amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 5.31 acres of real property located off Highland Avenue from Highway Commercial (HC) to Public Facility (PF). (Highland Avenue Zoning Map Amendment) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-17 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-17 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-17 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
A Zoning Map Amendment request to rezone approximately 5.31 acres located off Highland Avenue from Highway Commercial (HC) to Public Facility (PF). | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None | |||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Provide sustainable and equitable public facilities, services, and infrastructure systems in an efficient and effective manner to serve all population areas and demographics 2) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans REGIONAL PLAN: Goal REC.1. Maintain and grow the region’s healthy system of convenient and accessible parks, recreation facilities, and trails. Goal NH.1. Foster and maintain healthy and diverse urban, suburban, and rural neighborhoods in the Flagstaff region. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Options and Alternatives: 1) Approve the ordinance as proposed 2) Approve the ordinance with conditions 3) Deny the ordinance based on the required findings in Section 10-20.50.040(F)(1)(a) of the Flagstaff Zoning Code |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
The Applicant, the City of Flagstaff Recreation Department, on behalf of the property owner, the City of Flagstaff, is requesting a Zoning Map amendment to rezone approximately 5.31 acres to the Public Facility (PF) zone. The Public Facility (PF) zone is a more appropriate land use designation for the anticipated use as a public neighborhood park. Furthermore, it is the intent of this rezoning case to carry forward a deed restriction placed on the subject properties which states that they shall only be used for “open space and public park purposes.” | |||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
All proposed amendments shall be evaluated as to whether the application is consistent with and conforms to the goals of the General Plan and any applicable specific plans; and the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City of Flagstaff (the “City”) and will add to the public good as described in the General Plan; and the affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, shape, size, operating characteristics, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, public services, and utilities to ensure that the requested zone designation and the proposed or anticipated uses and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located. If the application is not consistent with the General Plan and any other applicable specific plan, the applicable plan must be amended in compliance with the procedures established in Chapter 11-10 of the City Code (Title 11: General Plans and Subdivisions) prior to considering the proposed amendment. | |||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
None | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Community benefits and considerations related to this Zoning Map amendment are addressed in the attached Planning and Zoning Commission staff report dated February 19, 2016. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
All property owners within 600-feet of this site were notified via mail of the zoning map amendment and asked to attend the October 19, 2015 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. Additionally, a notice was run in the Daily Sun, which discussed the zoning map amendment and identified the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting as a venue for discussion. The Commission did not meet quorum for their advertised meeting, but a public meeting for the rezoning was still held with the applicant and other City staff present. No members of the public inquired about the rezoning of this property. | |||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
None | |||||
Attachments: | PZ Staff Report | ||||
Application | |||||
Zoning Map | |||||
Public Notice | |||||
Exhibit A | |||||
Ord. 2016-17 | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration, and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-24: 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 0.81 acres located in Section 7, Township 21 North, Range 8 East, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, and establishing City zoning for said land as Rural Residential (RR) for 0.81 acres, providing for severability, authority for clerical corrections, and establishing an effective date. (Marquardt Annexation - Mountain Meadow Drive) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-24 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-24 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-24 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
An annexation request to obtain sewer service from Andrew and Stefanie Marquardt for the annexation of approximately 0.81 acres, located at 4419 N Mountain Meadow Drive and further described as Coconino County Assessor's Parcel Number 113-20-002, into the corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff and establishing the Rural Residential (RR) zoning district. | |||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
None
|
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Continue to implement the Flagstaff Regional Plan and focus efforts on specific plans REGIONAL PLAN: Policy E&C.5.3 Continue to enforce dark sky ordinances Policy WR.4.3. Development requiring public utility services will be located within the Urban Growth Boundary Policy LU.7.2. Require unincorporated properties to be annexed prior to the provision of City services, or that a pre-annexation agreement is executed when deemed appropriate |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
1) Approve the annexation with the conditions as presented by Staff and as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2) Approve the annexation with additional conditions, deleted conditions, or modified conditions. 3) Deny the annexation for non-compliance with the Regional Plan, the Zoning Code, and/or Arizona Revised Statutes. |
|||||
Background/History: | |||||
Andrew and Stefanie Marquardt, the property owners of record, are requesting the annexation of approximately 0.81 acres located at 4419 N Mountain Meadow Drive and more accurately described as Coconino County Assessor’s Parcel Number 113-20.002. The parcel is located within the Regional Plan Urban Growth Boundary and, upon annexation, will be located within the Rural Residential (RR) zoning district. The subject property is currently developed as a single-family residential dwelling with an accessory dwelling unit. There are no natural resources (rural floodplain, slope, or forest) on-site. For additional information regarding the characteristics of the site and reason for the request, please reference the attached Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report, Annexation Narrative, and Conceptual Plan. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
This annexation will increase the corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff and eliminate a parcel from a County island. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Inform Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council are conducted in conjunction with any annexation request. In accordance with Arizona Revised Statute and City Code, notice of the public hearing must be provided by placing an ad in a newspaper of general circulation within the City, posting at least three (3) notices on the property subject to the proposed annexation, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 300-feet of the property subject to the proposed annexation. All notifications must be completed at least 15-days prior to the first schedule public hearing. A copy of the publication notice, pictures of the postings, a mailing list, and a copy of the mailing notice are attached to this report. As of this writing, staff has received no comments from interested parties regarding the proposed annexation. |
|||||
Attachments: | Ord. 2016-24 | ||||
Annexation Petition, Legal Description, Affidavit | |||||
Planning Commission Staff Report | |||||
Annexation Narrative | |||||
Zoning Map | |||||
Concept Plan | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.C.
| |||||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-23: An ordinance of the Flagstaff City Council amending Title 7, Health and Sanitation, and Title 12, Floodplain, of the Flagstaff City Code, by amending Chapters 7-02-001-0039, Sewer Use Charges, Capacity Charges; 7-03-001-0010, Water Rates; and 7-03-001-0011, Water Main Capacity Charges; 7-03-001-0014 Water Conservation and Chapter 12-02-002-0003, Schedule of Stormwater Management Utility Service Charges and Fees, thereof. (Ordinance increasing certain utility rates, charges and fees) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
1) Read Ordinance No. 2016-23 by title only for the final time
2) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2016-23 by title only (if approved above) 3) Adopt Ordinance No. 2016-23 |
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
This action adopts an ordinance increasing water, sewer and stormwater user and service fees, and water and sewer capacity fees. A summary of the changes follows;
|
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
The City desires rates and fees that fully fund operations, maintenance and future capital costs for water and wastewater treatment; distribution and collection systems, and stormwater infrastructure. The city is facing several challenges to continuing its high quality operations. Utility revenues are not keeping pace with increasing operation, maintenance and capital costs. Water, Sewer and Stormwater user fees will be phased in over a five year period. The new rates would take effect on July 1, 2016 and the next increase on January 1, 2017 and then each January 1st through the year 2020. A summary of Council recommendations;
|
|||||
Connection to Council Goal and/or Regional Plan: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: Ensure Flagstaff has a long-term water supply for current and future needs 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: Goal WR.2.2 Maintain and develop facilities to provide reliable, safe and cost effective water and wastewater and stormwater services. Policy LU.1.5 Maintain and upgrade existing infrastructure and invest in infrastructure to make redevelopment and infill an attractive and more financially viable development option. |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
Yes, on August 25, 2015 Council adopted a Notice of Intent to consider increasing water, sewer, reclaimed water and stormwater rates. On February 17, 2016, Council gave direction on the rate changes as proposed herein. The Public Hearing and first read of this Ordinance was held on April 5, 2016. | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
An alternative would be to choose not to implement any rate modifications. The ramification of such action would be to reduce capital improvement projects contained within the ten year capital improvement program. This action would delay needed capital pipe replacement projects which increases maintenance costs for existing piping and limits infill development within the exiting infrastructure as well as necessary treatment plant maintenance and upgrades. | |||||
Background/History: | |||||
The City retained Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to prepare a long term financial plan and rate and fee study for each utility fund (water, wastewater, reclaimed water and stormwater) to ensure the Utilities Division has sufficient revenue to meet their operational, capital and debt service obligations and that rates are set proportionate to the costs of providing utility service to each customer class. As a part of this rate study, the consultant, facilitated dialog with the City's Water Commission and City staff at several Commission meetings over a period of seven months. During these meetings, the Commission made recommendations to be incorporated into the study where appropriate. The final draft report documents the findings, analyses and recommendations of the comprehensive rate and fee study effort. The results of the rate and fee study were then posted on the City website and presented by staff to numerous civic, neighborhood, business and manufacturing groups involving a variety of customers during numerous meetings and public presentations. The Water Commission final rate recommendations have been incorporated into the proposed rate and capacity fee modifications included in the final rate and fee study. The rate recommendations have been available online since July 16, 2015 and are on file with the City Clerk effective August 1, 2015. They will have been available for review and comment for more than 180 days prior to the ordinance consideration. There was extensive public outreach conducted prior to the first public hearing held on October 6, 2015. City Council continued the public hearing on October 13, 2015, October 20, 2015, November 17, 2015 and February 17, 2016. Proposed changes to reclaimed rates were discussed but are not included herein. Proposed changes to reclaimed rates, if any, will be brought forward to Council at a future date. |
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
Several objectives were identified during the rate study to guide decisions regarding the proposed financial plans and rate structures. The major objectives of the study were;
|
|||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Regular rate reviews and modifications are necessary to maintain a stable financial position for the water, wastewater and stormwater utility funds. The goal of the proposed rate increase is to provide for a financially sustainable utility system. The Community benefits of the proposed rate adjustments include updated water and sewer mains and services, new storm drain facilities to remediate current flooding conditions, and improved solids handling at the wastewater treatment plant facilities. |
|||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
Involve: During the Water Commission review and discussion on the rate study, local members of the community were very involved in the rate making process. The public and members of the commission asked questions, requested information, requested modification to rate structures, discussed impacts of Commission decisions. Inform: City staff has met with the numerous customer groups,across all customer classes to discuss and inform the public on proposed rates and fees adjustments to water, sewer and stormwater. Below is a summary of our public outreach efforts to inform the public.
|
|||||
Attachments: | Exhibit 2 - Water/Sewer Code Changes | ||||
Exhibit 3 - Stormwater Code Changes | |||||
Ord. 2016-23 | |||||
PowerPoint | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
14.D.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE: | |||||
Public Hearing, Consideration and Possible Adoption of Resolution No. 2016-13 and Ordinance No. 2016-22: Public hearing to consider proposed amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code, Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), and other related amendments in Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions) and Chapter 10-90 (Maps); consideration of Resolution No. 2016-13 declaring the proposed amendments as a public record; and adoption of Ordinance No. 2016-22, adopting amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), and other related amendments in Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions) and Chapter 10-90 (Maps), by reference. (Zoning Code Amendments - Sign Standards) | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Continue the Public Hearing to May 3, 2016.
|
|||||
Executive Summary: | |||||
Amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) are needed in response to the US Supreme Court's decision last year in the Reed v. Town of Gilbert sign case. At a work session with the Council on December 8, 2015 the reason for these amendments was discussed and an overview of them was presented by staff. Council provided direction to staff on these amendments which has been included in the amendments, which were reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission on February 24, 2016, attached to Resolution 2016-13. This public hearing was originally scheduled for March 22, 2016, at which time it was postponed to April 19, 2016. In order to allow a little more time without having to republish the notice of public hearing, this item has been included on this agenda strictly for the purpose of postponing the public hearing to May 3, 2016. |
|||||
Financial Impact: | |||||
Council's possible adoption of the proposed amendments to the City's sign standards will not have a financial or budgetary impact on the Comprehensive Planning and Code Administration Program's budget. | |||||
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 supports the amendments to Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) with the following goals and policies: 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.” |
|||||
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: | |||||
The Council held an executive session and work session on December 8, 2015 to discuss the proposed amendments to Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards). | |||||
Options and Alternatives: | |||||
Please refer to the Expanded Options and Alternatives below. | |||||
Background/History: | |||||
In June this year the US Supreme Court rendered its decision in the Reed v. Town of Gilbert sign code case which clarified when government regulation of speech is content based. Content-based laws are presumptively unconstitutional. The Supreme Court's decision in the Reed case has wide-ranging implications for sign ordinances in cities across the nation.
|
|||||
Key Considerations: | |||||
The proposed amendments to Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) are intended to ensure consistency with the US Supreme Court’s decision, and to streamline, simplify, and improve the standards to provide flexibility and maintain a positive community image, while supporting the needs of business owners. The amendment document attached to Resolution 2016-13 (2016 Amendments to City Code Title 10, Zoning Code, Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) and Other Related Divisions) is a “Clean” version of the amendments to the sign standards and other related sections with all changes accepted to assist in the Council's review (Attachment C.). This version has been reorganized into a more logical structure, cross references and formatting are completed, and it is a “final” draft. Note though that not all of the final illustrations have been inserted into the document as they are still being prepared. A “Track Changes” version of the draft amendments that shows new text in underline and text to be deleted in The majority of the amendments included within this Division, especially in the Portable Signs Section (formerly Temporary Signs), are proposed in response to the US Supreme Court’s decision in the Reed v. Town of Gilbert sign code case to ensure that the City’s sign provisions are content neutral. The Planning and Zoning Commission as part of their review of the entire Zoning Code in June 2015 recommended approval of a few minor amendments within the Permanent Sign Section of the Code (Section 10-50.100.060), and these, together with additional amendments, especially in the Portable Signs Section (10-50.100.090) are included in the attached amendments documents. The narrative below provides an overview of the more substantive amendments organized by Section and Subsection. 10-50.100.010 Purpose
The standards for signs on vehicles have been moved to Table 10-50.100.060.P (Standards for Other Sign Types), except that the standard prohibiting a vehicle from being used as an advertising sign remains in this Subsection.
Chapter 10-20 Administration, Procedures, and Enforcement: Division 10-20.40 Permits and Approvals Section 10-20.40.130 Sign Permits – Temporary Wall Banner Sign Permits
Division 10-80.20 Definition of Specialized Terms, Phrases, and Building Functions
Section 10-20.50.100.F of the Zoning Code establishes findings for the approval of text amendments. It is staff's recommendation that the Council may find that the proposed amendments to Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) and other related Divisions meets the following findings: Findings for Text Amendments:
|
|||||
Expanded Financial Considerations: | |||||
None. | |||||
Community Benefits and Considerations: | |||||
Flagstaff residents and business owners, users of the City's sign standards, and City staff will benefit from the adoption of these proposed amendments as they will fix known deficiencies and redundancies in the standards, simplify the permitting processes for temporary (portable) signs, clarify and simplify standards and procedures, and importantly, provide consistency with the US Supreme Court's decision in the Reed v. Town of Gilbert sign case by ensuring that the sign standards do no contain content-based regulations. | |||||
Community Involvement: | |||||
INFORM, CONSULT, and INVOLVE Once a preliminary draft of the proposed amendments to the Sign Standards was completed, staff has engaged with members of 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 to solicit their comments and reaction to the amendments. Also, a number of articles were published in the Flagstaff Business News and Cityscape, and staff has participated in frequent interviews on KAFF Radio. Consistent with state law and the requirements of the Zoning Code the Planning and Zoning Commission held a work session on the proposed sign code amendments on February 10, 2016. No residents were in attendance and no comments were provided to the Commission. The Council also held a work session on December 8, 2015 on the proposed amendments at which time general policy direction was provided to staff. No residents spoke to the Council at that work session. In advance of all Council and Planning and Zoning Commission work sessions as well as the Commission’s February 24th public hearing, staff has sent out an email to local stakeholder organizations such as Friends of Flagstaff’s Future, Northern Arizona Builders Association, Northern Arizona Association of Realtors, and the Flagstaff Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee. These groups were requested to forward the email to their members. Interviews with KAFF radio have also been scheduled regularly, and posts to the City’s Facebook accounts have been posted. Further, in compliance with state law and the Zoning Code’s noticing requirements, a ¼ page display advertisement (larger than the minimum required 1/8 page ad) was printed in the Arizona Daily Sun in advance of all public meetings and public hearings of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. About six members of the public attended the Planning Commission's February 24th public hearing, but none chose to speak to the Commission. At this meeting the Commission unanimously recommended that the Council approve the amendments to Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards) attached to Resolution 2016-13. |
|||||
Expanded Options and Alternatives: | |||||
|
|||||
Attachments: | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
15.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Consideration and Possible Action: Change to Summer Break Dates. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Should the Council wish to make changes to the Summer Break dates, there are two options available:
OPTION 1: Temporary - MOVE to suspend the Rules of Procedure, Rules 3.01 and 3.03, to change the Summer Break for 2016 to begin July 6, 2016, and end on August 15, 2016; or
OPTION 2: Permanent - MOVE to amend the Rules of Procedure, Rules 3.01 and 3.03, as reflected in the changes proposed. |
|||||
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: | |||||
On April 5, 2016, Mayor Nabours brought forward a F.A.I.R. item to discuss the possible change of dates for the Council's Summer Break, to coincide with time when school is out for those Councilmembers and staff members with children in school, and a majority of Council voted to bring this item back for consideration. Not having fully discussed the item yet, staff prepared this item to allow for either a temporary change for just 2016, or a permanent change for 2016 and into the future. Attached is a calendar showing that either time period would have the same number of days (41), as well as proposed changes to the Rules of Procedure should Council wish to make this a permanent change. | |||||
INFORMATION: | |||||
COUNCIL GOALS: 1) Invest in our employees and implement retention and attraction strategies 8) Improve effectiveness of notification, communication, and engagement with residents, neighborhoods and businesses and about City services, programs, policies, projects and developments |
|||||
Attachments: | Calendar | ||||
Rules.Change | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
17.A.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A request by Councilmember Putzova to place on a future agenda a discussion on strategies and implementation of the Regional Plan's climate change goals and policies. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Council direction.
|
|||||
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: | |||||
Rule 4.01, Procedures for Preparation of Council Agendas, of the City of Flagstaff City Council Rules of Procedure outlines the process for bringing items forward to a future agenda. Councilmember Putzova has requested this item be placed on an agenda under Future Agenda Item Requests (F.A.I.R.) to determine if there is a majority of Council interested in placing it on a future agenda. | |||||
INFORMATION: | |||||
None | |||||
Attachments: | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
17.B.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A request by Mayor Nabours to place on a future agenda a discussion on deleting the requirement that developers pay to the I-40/Lonetree traffic interchange. | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Council direction.
|
|||||
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: | |||||
Rule 4.01, Procedures for Preparation of Council Agendas, of the City of Flagstaff City Council Rules of Procedure outlines the process for bringing items forward to a future agenda. Mayor Nabours has requested this item be placed on an agenda under Future Agenda Item Requests (F.A.I.R.) to determine if there is a majority of Council interested in placing it on a future agenda. | |||||
INFORMATION: | |||||
None | |||||
Attachments: | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
17.C.
| |||||||||||
CITY OF FLAGSTAFF | |||||||||||
STAFF SUMMARY REPORT | |||||||||||
|
TITLE | |||||
Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A request by Mayor Nabours to place on a future agenda a discussion on using Pine Canyon fees for Lonetree improvements | |||||
RECOMMENDED ACTION: | |||||
Council direction.
|
|||||
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: | |||||
Rule 4.01, Procedures for Preparation of Council Agendas, of the City of Flagstaff City Council Rules of Procedure outlines the process for bringing items forward to a future agenda. Mayor Nabours has requested this item be placed on an agenda under Future Agenda Item Requests (F.A.I.R.) to determine if there is a majority of Council interested in placing it on a future agenda. | |||||
INFORMATION: | |||||
None | |||||
Attachments: | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||
Minutes Attachments | |||||
No file(s) attached. | |||||