REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING 4:00 P.M. MEETING |
|||||||
1. |
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Nabours called the meeting of November 18, 2014, to order at 4:01 p.m.
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
Others present: City Manager Kevin Burke; City Attorney Michelle D'Andrea. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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 None |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5. | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public Participation enables the public to address the Council about an item that is not on the agenda (or is listed under Possible Future Agenda Items). Comments relating to items that are on the agenda will be taken at the time that the item is discussed. If you wish to address the Council at tonight's meeting, please complete a comment card and submit it to the recording clerk as soon as possible. Your name will be called when it is your turn to speak. You may address the Council up to three times throughout the meeting, including comments made during Public Participation. Please limit your remarks to three minutes per item to allow everyone an opportunity to speak. At the discretion of the Chair, ten or more persons present at the meeting and wishing to speak may appoint a representative who may have no more than fifteen minutes to speak. None |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6. |
PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7. | APPOINTMENTS Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the City Council and to the general public that the City Council may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for the purpose of discussing or considering employment, assignment, appointment, promotion, demotion, dismissal, salaries, disciplining or resignation of a public officer, appointee, or employee of any public body...., pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(1). None |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
8. | LIQUOR LICENSE PUBLIC HEARINGS None |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
9. | CONSENT ITEMS
All matters under Consent Agenda are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion approving the recommendations listed on the agenda. Unless otherwise indicated, expenditures approved by Council are budgeted items. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Mark Woodson to approve Consent Items 9-A and 9-B. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A. | Consideration and Approval of Cooperative Contract: Purchase of one (1) Solid Waste Truck on a City of Mesa cooperative agreement (Approve purchase of Solid Waste collection truck).
Approve the purchase of one (1) Solid Waste collection truck from Rush Truck Center, Phoenix, Az. through a cooperative purchase agreement with the City of Mesa, Az. for the amount of $258,137.48 (tax included).
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
B. | Consideration and Approval of Contract: Construction Manager at Risk Design Phase Contract: Street Maintenance Program 2015, 2016 and 2017 (Approve contract with C and E Paving and Grading, LLC in the amount of $112,821.00)
1) Award the Construction Manager at Risk Contract with C and E Paving & Grading LLC in an amount not to exceed $ 112,821.00.
2) Authorize Change Order Authority of $ 11,282 (10%) to cover potential costs associated with unanticipated or additional items of work. 3) Authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
C. | Consideration and Approval of Purchase: Four (4) Police Interceptor Utility Vehicles | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mayor Nabours asked if Flagstaff would be paying sales tax to Peoria for the purchase and, if they had been purchased from a Flagstaff dealer if they would be paying sales tax to themselves. Candace Schroeder of the Purchasing Department said that they would be paying sales tax to either Peoria or Flagstaff; depending on where they were purchased. She emphasized that when they go with an Invitation for Bid, they have to go with the lowest responsible, responsive bidder. Purchasing Director Rick Compau explained that they were currently doing in-depth legal research on other considerations possible through the bidding process, such as carbon footprints, etc. Councilmember Barotz asked if it was state law or local rules that did not allow them to take those items into consideration. Mr. Compau replied that it was part of the state procurement rules; it carries to all public sector agencies throughout the state. He said that there are a few cities that have adopted a local bid preference, one of which is being challenged right now. Staff was asked to provide Council with information on whatever legislation says they have to abide by that law; perhaps lobbying to change it. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Mark Woodson to approve the purchase contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bid from Peoria Ford of Phoenix, for the purchase of four (4) Police Interceptor Utility model vehicles for the amount of $111,372.68, plus applicable fees | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
10. | ROUTINE ITEMS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A. | Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-40: A resolution of the Mayor and Council of the City of Flagstaff, Coconino County, Arizona, declaring official and adopting the results of the General Election held on November 4, 2014 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
City Clerk Elizabeth Burke reviewed the results of the November 4, 2014, election as outlined in the resolution:
CANDIDATES FOR COUNCIL
QUESTION NO. 406 – ROAD REPAIR AND STREET SAFETY INITIATIVE
Of the 21,281 Early Ballots submitted issued, the following results apply:
Based on the above-referenced results, the following individuals have been elected to their respective position and will assume said office on December 2, 2014:
Based on the above-referenced results, Question No. 406, the Road Repair and Street Safety Initiative has passed. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Celia Barotz, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to read Resolution No. 2014-40 by title only. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA, DECLARING OFFICIAL AND ADOPTING THE RESULTS OF THE GENERAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 4, 2014 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Karla Brewster, seconded by Councilmember Celia Barotz to adopt Resolution No. 2014-40. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
B. | Consideration and Approval of Contract: Involving Coconino Coalition for Children & Youth Program, Flagstaff Unified School District and the City of Flagstaff for the FACTS after school program funding for Fiscal Year 2015 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Councilmember Scott Overton to approve the Agreement with Flagstaff Unified School District and the Coconino Coalition for Children and Youth in the amount of $247,319.00 for the FACTS Program and $19,669.00 for the Coconino Coalition for Children & Youth Program. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
C. | Consideration of Agreement: Amended Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Coconino County for use of the Hazardous Products Center (HPC) (Approve amended IGA with County for use of the HPC). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Environmental Program Manager Noah Eismann said that approval of this IGA allows Coconino County residents and small businesses to continue utilizing the HPC to properly dispose of hazardous waste. He noted that Council approved this IGA in July of this year prior to the County proposing two changes to the language, neither of which affect either party in terms of cost or service. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Celia Barotz, seconded by Councilmember Karla Brewster to approve the IGA with Coconino County for use of the Hazardous Products Center (HPC). | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
D. | Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-28: An ordinance of the Mayor and Council amending Title II, Boards and Commissions, of the Flagstaff City Code by amending various boards and commissions of the City to provide for consistency in the number of members and their terms. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Scott Overton, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to read Ordinance No. 2014-28 by title only for the final time. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, COCONINO COUNTY, ARIZONA, AMENDING TITLE II, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 2-01, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-02, BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS; CHAPTER 2-03, PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-04, WATER COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-08, COMMISSION ON DIVERSITY AWARENESS; CHAPTER 2-10, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT; CHAPTER 2-11, FLAGSTAFF AIRPORT COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-12, TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-13, TOURISM COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-14, BEAUTIFICATION AND PUBLIC ART COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-17, SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-18, COMMISSION ON DISABILITY AWARENESS; CHAPTER 2?19, HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-20, OPEN SPACES COMMISSION; CHAPTER 2-22, FLAGSTAFF COMMUNITY LAND TRUST COMMISSION; AND CHAPTER 2-23, FLAGSTAFF AREA REGIONAL PLAN CITIZENS’ ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THEREOF |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Councilmember Mark Woodson to adopt Ordinance No. 2014-28. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
E. | Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance 2014-33: An ordinance of the Flagstaff City Council ratifying the sale of approximately 33.6 acres of real property consisting of three parcels located at the southeast and southwest corners of the intersection of Fourth Street and Route 66, and the northwest corner of Fourth Street and Huntington Drive adjacent to the Fourth Street Overpass (ordinance ratifying the sale of the TRAX properties) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Karla Brewster, seconded by Councilmember Celia Barotz to read Ordinance No. 2014-33 by title only for the first and final time. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AN ORDINANCE OF THE FLAGSTAFF CITY COUNCIL RATIFYING THE SALE OF APPROXIMATELY 33.6 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY CONSISTING OF THREE PARCELS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST CORNERS OF THE INTERSECTION OF FOURTH STREET AND ROUTE 66, AND THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF FOURTH STREET AND HUNTINGTON DRIVE ADJACENT TO THE FOURTH STREET OVERPASS |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Councilmember Karla Brewster to adopt Ordinance No. 2014-33. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
F. | Consideration and Approval of Grant Application and Intergovernmental Agreement: Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Taskforce Affiliate Sub-Grant Funds. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lt. Frank Higgins stated that entering into the Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Phoenix allows the Police Department to apply for grant funding managed by the AZ ICAC Taskforce. This funding is used for training and equipment needed to operate the computer forensics lab at the Flagstaff Police Department. For the 2014 - 2015 grant cycle, the Police Department is requesting $9,859.00 to pay for Basic Computer Forensic Examiner training which is conducted once a year in the United States by the International Association of Computer Investigative Specialists (IACIS). This training will enable the Police Department to train and certify a new forensic examiner. He said the remaining funds will be used for continuing education training for the remaining Certified Forensic Computer Examiner (CFCE) at the Police Department. This training is necessary so the examiner can maintain the necessary continuing education requirements needed to retain the certification as well as keep current with contemporary software and examination procedures. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Scott Overton, seconded by Councilmember Mark Woodson to approve the Grant Application and IGA with the City of Phoenix with the Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Taskforce for grant funds in the amount of $9,859. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
G. | Consideration and Approval of Contract: 4th Street Gateway Project. (Construction contract for 4th Street Gateway Public Art Project). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mark DiLucido, Community Design & Redevelopment Project Administrator, presented a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed project which addressed: PURPOSE PUBLIC PROCESSED DESIGN FEATURES FIRST DESIGN & BID PROCESS REBID PROCESS REQUESTED ACTION Councilmember Oravits said that he was glad to see this coming before the Council. He said that he had some concern with the malapai stone and possible graffiti. Mr. DiLucido said that there is a coating available that helps to make it easier to clean if it should get tagged. They did not include that in this bid. Their plan is to build it and hope it does not happen. If it does, then they will put the coating on. Councilmember Oravits said that they have had problems with people loitering at intersections in town. Mr. DiLucido said that this was public property owned by the City. They would have to treat it like everything else; if it became a problem they would have police address it. Mr. Burke said that the biggest mitigation is that the traffic is not stopping right in front of this which would make it more challenging for them. Mr. DiLucido said that the construction of the gateway would start this spring and finish in the summer. Prior to that they hope to issue a call to artists. He said that it will be a Beautification and Public Arts Commission decision and the business owners and residents were aligned on the idea of rotating pieces periodically. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Vice Mayor Coral Evans, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to approve a construction contract with Woodruff BWC Construction, in the amount of $233,969. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 6 - 1 Passed | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Councilmember Jeff Oravits, seconded by Councilmember Karla Brewster to approve Change Order Authority to the City Manager in the amount of $23,396.90 (10% of contract amount) and authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 6 - 1 Passed | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RECESS
The 4:00 p.m. portion of the November 18, 2014, Council meeting recessed at 4:42 p.m. 6:00 P.M. MEETING
RECONVENE
Mayor Nabours reconvened the Regular Meeting of November 18, 2014, at 6:02 p.m. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Farnsworth, Flagstaff, questioned what would prohibit the Indians from putting up a fence to keep the City out of using the Red Gap Ranch property and associated water rights, and he would like the Council to address that issue at some point. He also said that he voted against the road taxes because the state should be paying the City to fix those roads. Laura Vineyard, Flagstaff, voiced concern about two recent teen suicides within the last six months and asked that the Council think about it and possibly form a committee. Joe Ray, Flagstaff, congratulated the Council present tonight who were successful in the recent election. He said that it has been protocol for longer than the Mayor has been in Flagstaff that the highest vote getter be made Vice Mayor. The Council does not have the right to change something that has been in place for so long. Joanne Estes, Flagstaff, voiced concern with the icy intersection when exiting the interstate at McConnell. Emily Davalos, Flagstaff, said that the Public Participation has not been limited since she spoke out against it. Additionally, she agreed that the Vice Mayor position going to the members with the most votes is the best way to show that they value public input. John Viktora, Flagstaff, agreed that the system they have now for selecting the Vice Mayor should not be changed, and suggested that perhaps they should put the process in writing. Gabor Kovacs, Flagstaff, said that he supported the Mayor’s opinion that the Vice Mayor should besomeone who has not yet served in that capacity. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
13. | CARRY OVER ITEMS FROM THE 4:00 P.M. AGENDA |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A. | PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
i. | Reading of essays by NAU students winning the “This I Believe” Essay Contest |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rebecca Campbell, Director of the Program NAU Reads, said that she and her cohort Monica from the Public Library with Flagstaff Reads, worked on a project together this year where they all read the same book entitled "This I Believe." Monica then explained that they held a competition inviting students to submit their essays, and from the 14 submitted, the following were selected. She thanked Councilmember Barotz for attending the evening where they were read and enjoyed them so much she invited them to a Council meeting. She then introduced each of the students who read their respective essays: Cameron – I Believe in the Power of Words Emily Cain – I Believe in Miracles Rebecca Thomas – I Believe Life is Better with Dogs Danielle Brown – I Believe Kindness is Key |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ii. | Recognition of Plaza Vieja Neighborhood on their Safe Sidewalks designation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mayor Nabours read a Recognition of Plaza Vieja Neighborhood on their Safe Sidewalks designation and presented it to Irene and Jesse Dominguez, representing the neighborhood. He said that on October 18, the neighborhood worked hard to clear their sidewalks, making it the first safe sidewalk neighborhood, and had a barbecue with a great turnout. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
14. | PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-30: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona, extending and increasing the corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff, Coconino County, State of Arizona, pursuant to the provisions of Title 9, Chapter 4, Arizona Revised Statues, by annexing certain land totaling approximately 3.14 acres located at 2701 S. Woody Mountain Road, which land is contiguous to the existing corporate limits of the City of Flagstaff and establishing city zoning for said land as RR, Rural Residential. (Annexation of property for Aspen Heights located on Woody Mountain Road) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mayor Nabours said that they would be discussing Items 14-A and 14-B together. He said that they concluded the public comment portion of the public input over a four week period and two weeks ago they continued the Council discussion portion of the Public Hearing to this meeting, asking for the applicant to provide responses/rebuttals to issues raised at the last meetings. Charlie Votterott said that they appreciated the time that had been dedicated to their project. They were happy to answer questions they may have, but felt they had done a thorough job of demonstrating what they were committed to do with the community, and with their efforts with NAIPTA. He said that they have been structuring a development agreement to make sure the City can count on Aspen Heights living up to their commitments. Mayor Nabours read a list of tentative conditions in addition to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and asked if there had been any further development with NAIPTA. Ms. Kjellgren said that this afternoon she sent back the development agreement with her comments on just a few provisions they wanted amendments to. She believed they were close to having an agreement ready to go to the Board. She said that the amounts and times had not changed. She also noted that they did submit a more recent lighting plan that included lumens to just over 6,000 plus motion detectors. Kent Link with Arizona Department of Transportation addressed the Council in response to questions from Councilmember Overton who said that the wording of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was gray and asked if he could provide clarification. Additionally, Councilmember Overton said that there has been a lot of public testimony re concerns with bike transportation, but the TIA was mute on that issue. Mr. Link said that the language of the TIA was his. The traffic engineer hired by the developer completed a signal warrant study. Under federal and state laws the warrants must be met, but if they are met it does not mean they have to be installed. There are many intersections that have met warrants, but they did not put in a signal and this is one of those. With the traffic that Aspen Heights is projected to create, this intersection does not yet need a traffic signal. He said that not all traffic signals are good. When they are installed prior to the need it is common for crashes to increase. Councilmember Overton said that it is his understanding that this is why the City is requiring the developer to pay into a fund for a future signal and asking for right-of-way and property acquisition for a signal to be installed in the future. Mr. Link noted that signalized intersections are not the only option. They may realize that there is an eventual interchange planned for Woody Mountain Road that would have roundabouts. There are conceptual plans to have one at Woody Mountain and Route 66 and at Thompson, but those are years in the future. They are not currently planned or programmed. With regard to bicycles, Mr. Link said that ADOT currently has no planned improvements on Route 66 that would increase capacity to allow for construction of a wide shoulder like B40 in the west end. Councilmember Overton asked if that was programmed. Mr. Link said that the eventual completion of West Route 66 has been in and out of the queue for a number of years; it is not currently planned. The cost is estimated at $15 million from Riordan to Woody Mountain Road, based off of a 2007 Route Transit Study. He said that ADOT is currently in a preservation mode has HURF funds have declined and they are trying to maintain the capacity they have. Councilmember Oravits asked if he was understanding correctly that the signal is not warranted at this time, but the agreement requires the developer to set aside their proportionate costs associated with such a signal for its future installation. Ms. Antol said that was correct. Councilmember Oravits asked staff to review the bicycle connectivity. Ms. Antol reviewed the two maps which indicated the current FUTS and adjacent roads, as well as future planned segments that would develop as surrounding property was developed. Vice Mayor Evans said that she was understanding that ADOT controls Route 66 and at this time all improvements talked about are not currently in any plan or any funding. Mr. Link said that was correct; they are not in the five-year program. He said that they do have studies and there is a high level of planning with designs. Vice Mayor Evans asked what ADOT’s current budget was in Flagstaff. Mr. Link said that the current project on SR 180 is about $4.5 million; with the roundabouts in connection with J. W. Powell at about $14.5 to $25 million. Mr. Meilbeck said that at their October 29, 2014, meeting the NAIPTA Board directed him to continue negotiations with Aspen Heights with the following terms: Service from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. every 15 minutes during the week; every 30 minutes on weekends during the school year, for a cost of $137,802, for a term of ten years with no service when school is out Councilmember Barotz asked Aspen Heights how they manage the conflict of no transit service when school is out with 12 month leases. Mr. Votterott said that they are 12-month leases which includes a two-week period (typically in July) when there are few residents on site, although the property manager will still be there. He said that their experience is that not many of the students stay during the summer—maybe 20-25% remaining. Councilmember Woodson asked now the land was designated in the Regional Plan. Ms. Antol said that it is designated as mixed use; the current Regional Plan 2030 has it located within an urban activity center which calls for commercial development at the core. It could be an intersection within a ½ mile radius of 200+ acres. Councilmember Woodson then asked with this just being done in the Regional Plan what the expectation was in the lighting zone and how that would respond to this type of development. Ms. Antol said that the Naval Observatory did present issues regarding the activity center; those concerns were brought to the Council when the Regional Plan was reviewed for approval. The urban activity center remained in the plan and was voted with Lighting Zone One. Councilmember Woodson said that there has been some talk of having this development built on NAU property. If they did that, he asked what role the City would have in dictating the lighting, etc. Ms. Antol said that the City has no zoning oversight with development at NAU, unless NAU cooperates with them. She said that sometimes they let the City review the impact on roads, but they do not have the ability to directly make any requirement. He said that if they think that solves the problem, it could impact those neighborhoods worse without any City input. Councilmember Oravits asked what the footprint of their lighting was as proposed versus what the maximum allowable was now. Ms. Antol said that the map shows both lighting zones for the County and the City, with the more restrictive Lighting Zone One of the City’s applying. She said that the commercial portion allows 25,000 lumens per acre while the single-family portion is 10,000 per parcel (one unit per acre). The property falls within the RR zone except for the area to be annexed. She said that there are other uses that could be permitted, some requiring conditional use permits. Altogether, the current zoning is entitled to 360,000 for the single-family parcel and under their proposal it is at 305,000 lumens. Councilmember Woodson said that one of the considerations, as he understood it, was it was not just the lumens but the amount of time the lights are on. In a residential area they may have street lights on, but with an apartment or commercial use, they may have all-night lighting. Ms. Antol said that was correct, although they do have a curfew affiliated with uses in Zone One. She said that this issue is not as easy. A lot of it is the light source, the reflectivity, shielding, but different components of the Naval Observatory are affected by different components. Capt. Doster said that they just received the formal plan from Ms. Antol and just got a lighting expert on contract. They have not gotten to where they can make an assessment. At a rough look, while there is a reduction there is still significant impact and they remain opposed. He said that they have had the opportunity to work with City staff and have had productive meetings, but the last two weeks has just not been enough time. Ms. Antol reviewed the three findings and said that all three have to work. Councilmember Barotz asked the developer to speak to the price points per bedroom. Mr. Votterott said that they were looking at around $500 per bedroom. Councilmember Oravits said that as part of the development it included the Crime Free Multi Housing clause and requires onsite manager and security. Police Chief Kevin Treadway said that they are currently challenged with a large property in town that has not come on board after many attempts of persuasion. The department sees the program as being productive. With many of the properties with which they have had problems in the past they have been significantly reduced after participation in the program. Mayor Nabours asked where they were at with coordination with NAU. Chief Treadway said that they have had some ongoing conversations with the idea of NAU holding students accountable, and he believes it is a conversation that will continue. He said that NAU is looking at some type of sanctions. It is a conversation that needs to continue and Dr. Randall has agreed to continue it. Further discussion was held on the security of the development. Mr;. Votterott said that if they look at a management company that houses over 12,000 students they will have times where they may have issues. They handle them. Because of their high occupancies, it is very easy for them to terminate a lease; they have the right for violation in their behavior. They can move that tenant out and they do. Mayor Nabours closed the public hearing at this time. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comment cards were received from the following individuals opposed to the development: Branden Cote Sallie Kladnik Margaret Erhart Nick Kowall Koseh E. Jaraczewski, Jr. Vaughn Peterson Tammy S. Peterson Criselle Hogerman Jane O'Donnell Eva Rowe Sarah Johnson Frankie Beesley Laura C. Myers Roseana Cruz Kirgis John L. Fisher Mary McLellan Emily Outhwaite James Baker Bart Bartell Jose J. Dominguez Madison Ledgerwood Willis Cross Sam Holley Adam SAhimoni Jessica Anderson Clay Patton Lucas Klein The following individuals spoke in favor of Aspen Heights: Travis R. Estes Cynthia Dorfsmith |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Mark Woodson to read Ordinance No. 2014-30 by title only for the first time. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 5 - 2 Passed | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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 3.14 ACRES LOCATED AT 2701 S. WOODY MOUNTAIN ROAD, WHICH LAND IS CONTIGUOUS TO THE EXISTING CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF AND ESTABLISHING CITY ZONING FOR SAID LAND AS RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
B. | Public Hearing, Consideration and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-31: An Ordinance amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map designation of approximately 36.94 acres of real property generally located at the intersection of Route 66 and Woody Mountain Road, from Rural Residential ("RR") to Highway Commercial ("HC") for 3.6 acres, and to Medium Density Residential ("MR") for 33.33 acres. (Rezoning of property for Aspen Heights located on Woody Mountain Road) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councilmember Barotz said that she believed the public comment on this development has been made clear through all the e-mails of 303 against and 4 or 5 in support. Councilmember Overton asked what impact the petition submitted this evening would have, if any, on the way they vote. Ms. D'Andrea said that she has not seen any petition. She said that they would look at it before the second read of the ordinance to ensure that it does not require a super majority vote, which would only apply to second read and adoption of the ordinance. She said that she was not sure that the petition submitted this evening was in proper form and signed by the appropriate individuals that would require a supermajority vote. She suggested that they talk with the City Clerk and then they can go forward on that aspect. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Scott Overton to read Ordinance No. 2014-31 by title only for the first time to include the conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the following:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 5 - 2 Passed | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FLAGSTAFF ZONING MAP DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 36.94 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 66 AND WOODY MOUNTAIN ROAD, FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL ("RR") TO HIGHWAY COPMMERCIAL ("HC") FOR 3.6 ACRES, AND TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ("MR") FOR 33.33 ACRES |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mayor Nabours said that they need student housing in Flagstaff. They had representatives from Ft. Collins visit and express that this applicant had a development in Ft. Collins and they had no problems there. Regarding the issue of bike paths, it is provided for in both regional plans and tonight it was indicated that they are safest riding through Presidio in the Pines and Boulder Point. They have heard from ADOT that the project is not a problem. He believed that with what they have heard from management, they will not have drunken students running through the neighborhoods and the forest. He believed it would be quite different from the Groves and there are other student housing facilities in Flagstaff that operate within the law. Councilmember Barotz read into the record the findings they as a Council need to find in order to approve such a request:
She said that she cannot make all of these findings, and, in particular, there are some contrary to goals in the General Plan that do not support this. She also thinks that this particular project is not the right scale. She said that she was not saying that she does not support student housing. She will support the right kind of student housing, but having 714 students living in one place, even with some of the processes and programs proposed to be part of the project, still creates a concern for her which is why she cannot find the necessary findings. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
15. | REGULAR AGENDA | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A. | Consideration and Adoption of Resolution No. 2014-35 and Ordinance No. 2014-27: Proposed amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), specifically Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), and related amendments to Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions), and Chapter 10-90 (Maps); consideration of Resolution No. 2014-35 declaring the proposed amendments as a public record; and adoption of Ordinance No. 2014-27, adopting amendments to Flagstaff Zoning Code Chapter 10-20 (Administration, Procedures and Enforcement), Chapter 10-50 (Supplemental to Zones), specifically Division 10-50.100 (Sign Standards), Chapter 10-80 (Definitions), and Chapter 10-90 (Maps), by reference. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Planning Director Dan Folke said that he was filling in for Zoning Administrator Roger Eastman. He then reviewed the Summary of Changes that had previously been discussed, as well as a few changes recommended by Mr. Eastman as he was preparing the final packet for consideration. He said that Mr. Eastman made a change to Table G on page 56, which proposes a secondary sign, for those with a multi-tenant shopping center. It would be multi-tenant centers where the building is set back from the road and there is parking between the road and the building. These signs would be permitted without a time line or a permit required since it was not visible. They were also recommending that it be moved from that table into Table F, page 55, (placement of secondary sign). They also believe that the placement to advertise promotional or seasonal sales be eliminated, because the a-frame signs are time limited. Councilmember Barotz asked Mr. Folke to explain what the current rules are and proposed rules for temporary signs. Mr. Folke said that there were five types of temporary signs. They have to be removed or replaced after sixty days. He said that they allow one per business, even if a multi-tenant building. He said that they spend a significant time on temporary signs. Out of 736 cases opened, 151 of them (21%) related to temporary signs. Councilmember Barotz asked for clarification on the complaints received. Mr. Folke said that some are generated by citizens, some are staff, such as whenever they have observed a violation of the rules; no permit acquired, not proper location; time has lapsed. He believed that some of these changes may help staff with dealing with some of these issues. Mr. Folke said that the changes proposed deal mostly with time frames, changing it from 60 days a year to six days, ten times a year. All of the other time periods for other purposes are staying the same. They are hoping that this will assist with the proliferation of temporary signs. In multiple occupancy buildings for every 150 feet they get one temporary sign. The other change is the allowance of secondary a-frame signs. Mr. Burke asked about the secondary sign, and it was clarified that it was interior to the site, with a parking lot between the road and building. Councilmember Barotz said that she did not object to 99% of the changes, but the one piece she cannot understand is in attempting to deal with the a-frame signs, they are going to give the owners of a shopping center a second monument sign. She questioned the rationale in chart that says in commercial and industrial zones, they are going to increase the height of the area. She did not understand the relationship between the change offered and how it relates to the problem they are trying to solve. She is concerned that they are now saying the big box stores gets an even bigger sign and the small guy in a multi-tenant center gets a little pad on a monument sign. Councilmember Barotz asked why Wal-Mart would need a bigger sign. Mr. Folke talks about those changes between Type A and Type B signs. She wants to help those in the multi-tenant building without a need to increase the big box signs. Mayor Nabours said that he believed their intent was to help the small business. Vice Mayor Evans asked if they could limit this to only multi-tenant buildings. Ms. D’Andrea replied that they could. Council agreed that was the intent and staff was directed to make that change to the table for the free-standing signs that it applied only for multi-tenant signs. Councilmember Barotz said that the idea is they are not going to increase the standards for permanent signs for use by institution, commercial and industrial, they will stay the standards they are today, other than the 400 feet; all agreed. Councilmember Barotz said that Nat White provided the Council with some visuals that were powerful in showing what could have happened. She also thanked him for his assistance in reviewing these proposals. Mr. Folke said that the table they will revise is on page 23, Standards for Permanent Signs, Type A and Type A for multi-tenant and Type B and Type B for multitenant. Also they agreed on the 400’ for Type B only for multi-tenants (Table H), with everyone else remaining at the 500’. The following individuals spoke in regard to the amendments:
The following comments were received:
Brief discussion was held on the use of wrapped vehicles. Mr. Folke said that if they are using those vehicles for their business they need to be parked in an authorized manager, and that is the proposed language. When the principle use is that of a sign, it falls under the restrictions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to adopt Resolution No. 2014-35, as amended. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to read Ordinance No. 2014-27 by title only for the final time. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA, ADOPTING THAT CERTAIN DOCUMENT ENTITLED “2014 AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 10-50, SUPPLEMENTAL TO ZONES, SPECIFICALLY, DIVISION 10-50.100, SIGN STANDARDS,” BY REFERENCE |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moved by Mayor Jerry Nabours, seconded by Councilmember Jeff Oravits to adopt Ordinance No. 2014-27. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vote: 7 - 0 Passed - Unanimously | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
16. | DISCUSSION ITEMS None |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
17. | POSSIBLE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Verbal comments from the public on any item under this section must be given during Public Participation near the beginning of the meeting. Written comments may be submitted to the City Clerk. After discussion and upon agreement of three members of the Council, an item will be moved to a regularly-scheduled Council meeting. None |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
18. | INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS FROM COUNCIL AND STAFF, REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councilmember Overton thanked everyone for voting and congratulated the elected officials and the passage of the tax proposition. He also congratulated Mr. Burke in his selection as the Town Manager of Paradise Valley. Councilmember Oravits reminded everyone that they were collecting turkeys for the Food Bank from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
19. | ADJOURNMENT | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CERTIFICATION
I, ELIZABETH A. BURKE, do hereby certify that I am the City Clerk of the City of Flagstaff, County of Coconino, State of Arizona, and that the above Minutes are a true and correct summary of the Meeting of the Council of the City of Flagstaff held on November 18, 2014. I further certifty that the Meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present.
|