Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/05/2005 Council Agenda Packet TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 13251 N. Lon Adams Road April 5, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Vice Mayor Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Bobby Sutton, Jr. Herb Kai Jim Blake Patti Comerford Tim Escobedo Ed Honea Carol McGorray Welcome to this Marana Council Meeting. Regular Council Meetings are usually held the first and third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at the Marana Town Hall, although the date or time may change, or Special Meetings may be called at other times and/or places. Contact Town Hall or watch for posted agendas for other meetings. This agenda may be revised up to twenty-four hours prior to the meeting. In such a case a new agenda will be posted in place of this agenda. If you are interested in speaking to the Council during Petitions and Comments, Public Hearings, or other agenda items, you must fill out a speaker card (at the rear of the Council Chambers) and deliver it to the Clerk in advance of the agenda item you wish to address. It is up to the Mayor and Council whether individuals will be allowed to address the Council on issues other than Announcements, Petitions & Comments, and Public Hearings. All persons attending the Council Meeting, whether speaking to the Council or not, are expected to observe the Council Rules, as well as the rules of politeness, propriety, decorum and good conduct. Any person interfering with the meeting in any way, or acting rudely or loudly will be removed from the meeting and will not be allowed to return. To better serve the citizens of Marana and others attending our meetings, the Council Chamber is wheelchair and handicapped accessible. Any person who, by reason of any disability, is in need of special services as a result of their disability, such as assistive listening devices, agenda materials printed in Braille or large print, a signer for the hearing impaired, etc.,. will be accommodated. Such special services are available upon prior request, at least ten (10) working days prior to the Council Meeting. For a copy of this agenda or questions about the Council Meetings, special services, or procedures, please contact Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk, at 682-3401, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. ACTION MAY BE TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL ON ANY ITEM LISTED ON THIS AGENDA. Amended agenda items appear in italics. Posted no later than April 4, 2005, 7 o'clock p.m., at the Marana Town Hall, Marana Operations Center and at www.marana.com under Town Clerk, Minutes and Agendas. 1 TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 13251 N. Lon Adams Road April 5, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Alexis Lumceford, Poppy Princess, Casas Adobes American Legion Auxiliary III. INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE IV. ROLL CALL V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA VI. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES Minutes of February 1, 2005 Regular Council Meeting Minutes of February 15, 2005 Regular Council Meeting Minutes of February 15, 2005 Study Session Minutes of February 22, 2005 Study Session Minutes of March 1,2005 Regular Council Meeting Minutes of March 12, 2005 Study Session Minutes of March 15, 2005 Regular Council Meeting VII. CALL TO THE PUBLIC - ANNOUNCEMENTS - INTRODUCTIONS - UPCOMING EVENTS At this time, any member of the public is allowed to address the Town Council on any issue not already on tonight's agenda. The speaker may have up to three (3) minutes to speak. Any persons wishing to address the Council must complete a speaker card (located at the rear of the Council chambers) and deliver it to the Town Clerk prior to this agenda item being called. Pursuant to the Arizona Open Meeting Law, at the conclusion of Call to the Public, individual members of the Council may respond to criticism made by those who have addressed the Council, may ask staff to review the matter, or may ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda. VIII. STAFF REPORTS IX. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. CONSENT AGENDA The consent agenda contains agenda items requiring action by the Council which are generally routine items not requiring council discussion. A single motion will approve all items on the consent agenda, including any resolutions or ordinances. A Council Member may remove any issue from the consent agenda, and that issue will be discussed and voted upon separately, immediately following the consent agenda. 2 TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 13251 N. Lon Adams Road April 5, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. 1. Resolution No. 2005-35: Relating to Parks and Recreation; approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an intergovernmental agreement with Pima County for the Marana Cultural and Heritage Park Project (Frank Cassidy) 2. Resolution No. 2005-36: Relating to Parks and Recreation; approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an intergovernmental agreement with Pima County for the Tortolita Trail System (Frank Cassidy) 3. Resolution No. 2005-37: Relating to Water; consenting to the annexation of property owned by Cortessa, L.L.c. into the Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District (Brad DeSpain) 4. Resolution No. 2005-38: Relating to Standing Boards, Committees and Commissions; approving reappointments to the Town of Marana Business Advisory Committee (Roy Cuaron) 5. Resolution No. 2005-39: Relating to Development; approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an Amendment to Development Agreements relating to the definition of "Resort Hotel" under the Dove Mountain Resort Agreement recorded at Docket 11594, Page 3855; and declaring an emergency (Frank Cassidy) 6. Relatinf! to Personnel; approving and authorizing the reclassification of a Planner II position to Landscape Architect and hiring a Landscape Architect and a Court Security Officer with appropriate salary levels (Jane Howell) 7. Relatinf! to Administration; adopting the Town of Marana Policy for Office Assignments for Council Members (Mike Reuwsaat) 8. Proclamation: Arizona Work Zone Safety Awareness Week (Jocelyn Bronson) B. COUNCIL ACTION 1. Presentation: Casa Seville Specific Plan (Barbara Berlin) 2. PUBLIC HEARING. Ordinance No. 2005. 10: Relating to Development; approving a rezoning of 20 acres of land from Zone "C" to Zone "HI" south of Tangerine Road and east of Breakers Road (Barbara Berlin) 3. Presentation: Development Impact fees for Townwide Parks and Northwest Marana Roadways (Jim DeGrood) 3 TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 13251 N. Lon Adams Road April 5, 2005 - 7:00 p.m. 4. Ordinance No. 2005.11: Relating to Development; identifying the Marana Park Benefit Area, accepting and approving the technical report identifying park needs within that area, adopting park development impact fees for that area, and providing an effective date (Jim DeGrood) 5. Ordinance No. 2005.12: Relating to Development, identifying the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area, accepting and approving the technical report identifying the roadway needs within the benefit area, adopting roadway development impact fees for that area, and providing an effective date (Jim DeGrood) 6. State Lef!islative Issues: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending bills before the Legislature (Michael Racy) c. MAYOR AND COUNCIL'S REPORT D. MANAGERS' REPORT X. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS XI. ADJOURNMENT J#;k Bobby Sutton, Jr., Mayor 4 MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 1,2005 PLACE AND DATE Marana Town Hall, February 1,2005 I. CALL TO ORDER By Mayor Sutton at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Mayor Sutton III. INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE A moment of silence was observed. IV. ROLL CALL COUNCIL Bobby Sutton, Jr. Herb Kai Jim Blake Patti Comerford Tim Escobedo Ed Honea Carol McGorray Mayor Vice Mayor Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Present Present Present Present Present Present Present STAFF Mike Reuwsaat Janet Barr Frank Cassidy Jocelyn Bronson Town Manager Asst. Town Manager Town Attorney Town Clerk Present Present Present Present Attached is a list of public attendees. V. Approval of Al!enda A motion to approve the agenda as written was made by Council Member McGorray, seconded by Council Member Comerford. The motion carried unanimously. IV. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES A motion was made by Council Member Comerford to approve the minutes of the January 4, 2005, regular meeting. The motion was seconded by Council Member McGorray, and was unanimously approved. MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 1,2005 VII. CALL TO THE PUBLIC/ANNOUNCEMENTS Chief Vidaurri noted that he attended a presentation put on by the Sons of the American Revolution 2004 Outstanding Law Enforcement Officers in Southern Arizona. Marana Police Officer Bobby Derfus was awarded the outstanding Officer of the Y ear Award for 2004 for the Marana Police Department. Chief Vidaurri introduced Officer Derfus and noted several of his achievements over the past year. . VIII. STAFF REPORTS There were no questions regarding the staff reports. IX. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution No. 2005-15: Relating to Liquor Licenses; approving a recommendation to the Arizona Department of Liquor License & Control for a No. 12 (Restaurant) liquor license submitted by Texas Roadhouse Holdings, LLC, located at 8450 N. Cracker Barrel Road. (Jocelyn Bronson) 2. Resolution No. 2005-14: Relating to Transportation; approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Marana and Pima County for the sharing of costs involved in the provision of public transit services to certain areas of Pima County and the Town of Mar ana. (Jim DeGrood) 3. Resolution No. 2005-13: Relating to Subdivisions; approving a Final Plat for the Re-subdivision of Gladden Farms Blocks 13, 14, and 15. (Barbara Berlin) A motion was made by Council Member Escobedo to approve the Consent Agenda, seconded by Council Member Blake. The motion carried unanimously. B. COUNCIL ACTION 1. Update: Municipal Complex (Marc Thompson. D.L. Withers). Mr. Reuwsaat introduced Keith Dumais, construction manager for D.L. Withers, who presented the signage that was chosen by the building committee. Keith also noted that March 15th was still the target date for completing the building, or at least for moving furniture. He also noted that the first floor was about done. The second floor was painted and the third floor would be painted tomorrow. The Council chamber itself was being dry-walled today and the roof was dried in, so that would be coming along quickly. Regarding site work, Barnett would be opened Monday. Grier Road would be closed down on Tuesday. They were going to try to have Grier done by the end of April, depending on the weather. Mayor Sutton noted that he had taken a mini-tour of the building and was very impressed MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 1,2005 with it. Mr. Reuwsaat thanked Keith for his part in moving the building along, and noted the tentative move-in schedule for the Court and the Police, including dispatch, which would require a one-day turnover. 2. Presentation: Municipal Complex Ribbon-Cuttinl! and Dedication Ceremonv (Mike Reuwsaat). Mr. Reuwsaat noted that the dedication of the new facility has tentatively been scheduled for Founder's Day. The inclement weather experienced this winter has made it unfeasible to hold the event in the courtyard where a lot of the activities were going to occur on Founder's Day. Mr. Reuwsaat asked for Council's recommendation on where to move the dedication, noting that the date would determine the tone and tenor. The first option was to hold it the first Council meeting of May, on a Tuesday night. Basically, there would be a ceremonial Council Meeting with ribbon cutting and fireworks, with the events ending at about 8:30 p.m. A second option would be basically, the same format, but it would be held on a Friday or Saturday evening. The advantage to that being that more residents may come to a Friday or Saturday event than to a Tuesday night. Mayor Sutton noted that members of the Legislature would probably be more available on a weekend but also that Cinco de Mayo was that weekend, which might compete with the dedication event. After a brief discussion as to the pros and cons of the options, the Mayor moved to hold the dedication the night of May 3. The motion was seconded by Council Member Escobedo, and the motion carried unanimously. 3. Information/Presentation: Proposed art work and landscape architecture for Cortaro Farms Road. UPRR to Star Grass Drive (Harvev Gill). Council Member Escobedo introduced the project manager for the Cortaro Farms Road, Mr. Leonard Fuentes for CPE Consultants, who gave an update on the art work and the landscaping. Mr. Fuentes gave an overview of the status of the roadway project, including the art and landscaping elements associated with the project. He introduced artists, Nina Borgia- Aberle and Stephen Grede, and the landscape architect, Rick Schoenfeld They presented the art and landscaping integrated elements of the project. Ms. Borgia-Aberle spoke on behalf of herself and Mr. Grede, and reviewed their tenure with the project beginning in January of 2001, noting that they had met with the citizens advisory committee first and then members of the community at the first open house on April 26, 2001. During this open house, they spoke to many members of the community about their initial concepts and distributed questionnaires. Ms. Borgia-Aberle noted that a copy of the questionnaire was in the paperwork given to the Council Members, further stating that honoring the natural environment as well as many historical references, MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 1,2005 including dairy farming and specific reference to the roadway's namesake, Cortaro Farms, was the focus of their research. The rural aspect and feeling of the area, including the pristine stretches of desert that still existed, added to how they decided to create a cross section of a native flower to enhance the railings that would be necessary along the sidewalks on the north side of Cortaro from east of the railroad tracks to Hartman Lane. An art element would be placed at 10-foot increments along 1,720 feet of railing, or approximately 172 art elements. Their final meeting with the community was on October 8, 2002, when they presented their final design for the cow element and the art element for the railing, including color choices for the railing. The cowart element would be fully integrated with the landscape design and would have lighting, making it visible at night. Mr. Schoenfeld then presented the landscape project as a desert, low-water-use design that relies heavily on native vegetation to this area. The design was driven by the plants that were salvaged as part of native plant preservation plan process. They noted the drainages that would impact major washes. There was also a requirement to have significant tree plantings in the median isle, as well as the shoulders. There would be transplanted ironwood, palo verde, some desert willow, a number of saguaros that are along the alignment. He then showed a typical section with accent plants approaching the medians and concrete pavers as well as sidewalks of decomposed granite. He noted that all planting would be watered by an automatic drip irrigation system. Mayor Sutton noted general agreement with the railing and landscape plan but voiced his about the cow. It was an 80-square-foot cow. In comparing the cow concept with the current Marana monument sign near the Pinal County line, he noted that the existing monument was a descriptive history of Marana, and that most people wouldn't understand the concept of the cow as part of Marana's history. He stated that unless there was a description of why the cow was there, he didn't care for the cow being there. Mr. Schoenfeld clarified for the Council that the cow was included in the design prior to Marana's annexation of the area. When this process was done originally, it was actually done through Pima County, prior to the Willow Ridge annexation by Marana. As part of the IGA with Pima County, CPE agreed not change the landscaping and some of the design, and that was why the artists brought the cow before Council. So this group of artists and people did work with the community, but it wasn't Marana at the time, which was why it is coming before the Council now. Council Member Blake asked that Mr. Schoenfeld define the community that was originally approach. Ms. Borgia-Aberle responded that Pima County design/transportation has a process where they do mailings within a certain number of feet from the roadway, generally within a half mile from the road, so everybody who lived near Cortaro Farms Road was invited to the meetings. That mailing was extended to some other residents who were affected by the project. On the citizens' advisory committee, there were 12 key people in the neighborhood from neighborhood associations, and others who served on the citizens' advisory committee to the County. CPE's design was completed a year and a half ago, so MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 1,2005 it was before the Town of Marana annexed the property. There were two public meetings. The first meeting on April 26, 2001 included about 40 or 50 residents. Prior to that, they met with the citizens' advisory committee. Then they met with the general public after Pima County did a mailing for the open meeting. Mayor Sutton expressed his concern that there was not one Marana resident in that group, in 2001, because Marana had not started construction of home in that area. If there were residents, they constituted a small amount. Based on annexations, there are some people on that road now but weren't included in this process. Mayor Sutton gave direction to staff to get together with the artists and bring the item back at a future date after further public input regarding design, noting that much of what has been done on the project was still viable. Perhaps a design incorporating a collage with a cow and a cotton bloom and the Santa Cruz River and something showing the water our community was built on and based here and the reason they are here would be more appropriate. Mr. Barr agreed to move that process forward, again noting that he would work with the artists and share what was being done artistically with the new municipal complex area so that there was some consistency in the public road art throughout the town. Mr. Fuentes concluded the presentation by updating Council on actual roadway projects. They do have the two roadway projects. One was Cortaro Farms from the railroad to Star Grass Drive. The second project was the intermittent safety improvements at Hartman Lane and Cortaro Farms Road. This intersection improvement was advertised the first week of January. They received bids on January 13th. The low bid was $40,000 less than the engineer's estimate. The low bidder was Dar-Hil Corporation. It was my understanding that their contract was supposed to be executed today. 4. Resolution No. 2005-11: Relating to Subdivisions; approving a Preliminary Plat for Saguaro Ranch T-Bench Bar (Barbara Berlin) Ms. Berlin presented this item to Council for consideration and gave a brief overview of the project. Upon motion by Council Member McGorray seconded by Council Member Honea the motion was unanimously approved. 5. Resolution No. 2005-12: Relating to Subdivisions; approving a Preliminary Plat for Saguaro Ranch South Amended Lots 1-31 (Barbara Berlin) Ms. Berlin presented this item to Council for consideration. Upon motion by Council Member Escobedo, seconded by Council Member McGorray, the motion was unanimously approved. 6. Update: Pending Water Issues (Mike Reuwsaat) MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 1,2005 Mr. Reuwsaat noted that due to the importance of this item, any matters regarding water would be placed on the regular council agenda as necessary. He then briefly updated Council on current activities, both locally, regionally and statewide. 7. State Legislative Issues: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending bills before the Legislature (Mike Reuwsaat) The League of Cities and Towns Legislative Issues Bulletins Nos. 1 and 2 were distributed to Council for information. C. MAYOR AND COUNCIL'S REPORT D. MANAGERS' REPORT Audio difficulties occurred during the Mayor and Council and Managers' reports. X. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS There were no items. XI. ADJOURNMENT A motion to adjourn was made by Council Member Escobedo, seconded by council Member McGorray. Upon unanimous approval, Mayor Sutton adjourned the meeting at 7:58 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the Marana Town Council regular meeting held on February 1, 2005. I further certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 PLACE AND DATE Marana Town Hall, February 15,2005 I. CALL TO ORDER By Mayor Sutton at 7:02 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Mayor Sutton III. INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE A moment of silence was observed. IV. ROLL CALL COUNCIL Bobby Sutton, Jr. Mayor Present Herb Kai Vice Mayor Excused Jim Blake Council Member Present Patti Comerford Council Member Present Tim Escobedo Council Member Excused Ed Honea Council Member Present Carol McGorray Council Member Present STAFF Mike Reuwsaat Town Manager Jaret Barr Asst. Town Manager Frank Cassidy Town Attorney Jocelyn Bronson Town Clerk Attached is a list of public attendees. V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council Member Honea asked for changes to the order of the agenda items which included moving Consent Agenda Item A.2., Resolution No. 2005-19, to the first item heard under Council Action. Upon a motion by Council Member Comerford, seconded by Council Member McGorray, the amended agenda was unanimously approved. VI. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES There were no minutes presented for approval. VII. CALL TO THE PUBLIC/ANNOUNCEMENTS MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 Amber Moore reported on the bowling tournament sponsored by the Chamber, in which the proceeds went to the Marana Health Center and to the pediatric Reach-out and Read program. She then presented a bowling pin from the tournament for the new Town Center which all of the players had signed. Kathy Ward, Vice President of Corporate Services and Interim Director for the Greater Tucson Economic Council presented the second quarter contractual report for economic development servIces. Ms. Ward reported on nine real estate searches conducted by GTEC for properties in the greater Tucson region. Marana received copies of all the searches for which fifteen client visits were hosted. No client visits were scheduled in Marana during the quarter due to lack of available properties matching the client requirements. No company announcements regarding locations were made during the quarter. Janis Mitich, with the Marana Arts Council, announced the culminating event for the Founders' Day celebration. The Marana Arts Council was co-sponsoring a trail ride for the arts at Picacho Peak on Saturday, March 26. She encouraged the Council and public to attend, and ended her presentation with a reading of a poem written by her father. Harvey Gill introduced Carl Larson, who was the new project manager for CIP projects in the engineering division. Carl's primary responsibility would be to track the ongoing bond projects within the Town, primarily to ensure that the required bond implementation process was being followed. Charlotte Violet addressed the Council as a private advocate of the library in Marana. She asked for help from the Council in getting more visibility for the Marana branch of the Tucson-Pima Library - primarily to keep an active presence in the community for children. VIII. STAFF REPORTS IX. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution No. 2005-18: Relating to Water Service; approving and authorizing the execution of the Agreement between the Town of Marana and US Home Corporation for Construction of Water Facilities Under Private Contract for Continental Reserve Block 17. (Brad DeSpain) 3. Resolution No. 2005-20: Relating to Subdivisions; approving a Final Block Plat for Vanderbilt Farms. (Barbara Berlin) 4. Revision of Mobile State Rental Application and Al!reement (Ron Smith) MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 5. Vision Endorsement Resolution: Center for the Future of Arizona (Mike Reuwsaat) Council Member Honea made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda, items A 1,3,4, and 5, seconded by Council Member McGorray. The motion was approved unanimously. B. COUNCIL ACTION A2. Resolution No. 2005-19: Relating to Development; ratifying the recommendation of approval by the Manager's Design Review Committee regarding design review for the Silverbell Wade Commercial Center (Barbara Berlin) Ms. Berlin presented this item, noting that this was an action recommending ratification of approval by the Manager's Design Review Committee regarding a project for the SilverbellIWade Commercial Center. This was located at the northwest corner of Silverbell and Wade and was approximately 21,600 square feet of building area, with a height of 22 feet as shown. She had stated during the design review committee process, a couple of revisions were made per the recommendations of the committee. This was the final version, and the action requested of the Council was to either affirm or reverse in whole or in part or modify the design review committee's recommendation. The recommendation was to ratify as shown. Council Member Comerford asked for a point of clarification on the varying heights, the detention/retention basin and the material for the driveway sections. Ms. Berlin stated that the maximum height was 22 feet, so the other areas were lower. She noted that the detention/retention basin was not included for tonight's action and that that item had not gone through review. The driveway was stamped concrete colored stain. A motion to approve Resolution 2005-19 was made by Council Member McGorray, seconded by Council Member Honea. The motion carried 3 to 2. Council Members Comerford and Blake voted no. 1. Presentation on the Perimeter Bicycle Association's "Tour of the Tucson Mountains" (Jim DeGrood) Roy Schoonover was introduced by the Town Manager to present this item to Council. Mr. Schoonover noted that he was a volunteer with Perimeter Bicycling, a 501C3 nonprofit organization which had sponsored the EI Tour de Tucson for 23 years. For 19 years, the tour had been through the Tucson Mountains. He noted that the proposal to Council was to move the 70-mile ride to Marana which would financially benefit the community through the use of hotels and restaurants, as people of all ages come from around the country to attend this ride. Mr. Reuwsaat noted that staff was asked for direction to go ahead and work with the Perimeter Bicycling Association on this event, and that it would provide the kind of MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 exposure and the kind of regional event that would add to the good things that were being done in the community. 2. Ordinance No. 2005.05: Relating to development; approving a Specific Plan Amendment for the Rancho Marana Specific Plan (Barbara Berlin) Ms. Berlin gave an overview of the long and varied history of the item, including the earlier inconsistencies with the Northwest Marana Area Plan, stating that staff was requesting approval of a Specific Plan Amendment for the Rancho Marana Specific Plan. She also noted that it was significant that the developer had agreed to withhold portions of the Specific Plan area that fall within the Town Center for which they were planning new design review criteria. The agreement was that they would adopt and incorporate into this plan the Town Center plan, assuming that it would be completed before February of 2006. If that was not the case, the plan as shown before you would take effect. Mr. Reuwsaat emphasized that what was being presented was permission for the owner/developer to go ahead with Blocks 9, 14,23 with R-6 development, and Block 8, subject to Council approval. The rest of the blocks were being held until the Town Center was complete. Council Member McGorray made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 2005.05, seconded by Council Member Comerford. The motion passed unanimously. 3. Ordinance 2005.06: Relating to Rezoning; adopting the Ina/Silverbell Rezoning (Barbara Berlin) Ms. Berlin addressed the Council, noting that this was a continuance of the item that was begun in June of 2004 when the public hearing was held. The issues of right-of- way, utility easements, and other dedications have been resolved. There was an agreement with regard to support for the schools, and rezoning was now before you for final adoption. A motion was made by Council Member Honea to adopt Ordinance No. 2005.06, seconded by Council Member McGorray. The motion carried unanimously. 4. Ordinance No. 2005.04: Relating to Annexation; annexing into the corporate limits that territory known as the Saguaro Springs West Annexation comprising approximately 22 acres of land on the north side of Twin Peaks Road and immediately west of the Saguaro Springs development (Dick Gear) Mr. Reuwsaat presented this item to Council as the finalization of the piece that was traded with Arizona Portland Cement and Saguaro Springs. Staff was recommending Council approval. Council Member Honea made a motion to approve Ordinance 2005.04, seconded by Council Member McGorray. The motion was approved unanimously. MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 5. Ordinance No. 2005.07: Relating to Development; amending the CALMAT Specific Plan to allow for the continued use of plant site/storage authorized by Ordinance NO. 96.49 until May 14, 2005; and declaring an emergency (Frank Cassidy) Mr. Cassidy addressed the Council stating that item simply gives a retroactive extension to an existing CALMA T Specific Plan. Cemex was preparing a new Specific Plan which would be brought forward as soon as it was prepared. This would extend the time to May 14,2005. Mr. Reuwsaat noted that the applicant had asked for an extension through December, but since staff had already granted two extensions, a further delay could hinder the progress toward the alignment of Tangerine Farms Road. They need to have this Specific Plan and in for consideration so they have that alignment. A motion was made by Council Member McGorray to adopt Ordinance 2005.07, seconded by Council Member Blake. The motion carried unanimously. 6. Resolution No. 2005-16: Relating to Subdivisions; approving a Preliminary Plat for Continental Ranch Parcel 39 (Barbara Berlin) Ms. Berlin presented this item, noting that the 10-acre parcel that had been the school site was now being platted at densities consistent with the lowest densities of the surrounding area. There were some concerns about the location of the park. They have been solved successfully, and staff recommends approval. She further noted that the item had gone to the Planning Commission and had been recommended for approval. A motion was made by Council Member Blake to approve Resolution No. 2005-16, seconded by Council Member McGorray. The motion was unanimously approved. 7. Update: Pendinl! Water Issues (Mike Reuwsaat) Mr. Reuwsaat stated that there was nothing to report at this time. 8. State Lel!islative Issues: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending bills before the Legislature (Mike Reuwsaat) Michael Racy noted that there was a tremendous amount of activity in the Legislature relating to cities and towns, some of which was fairly hostile. He noted that he would try to have a written report to Council prior to meetings, but also stated that things were moving so quickly that the information becomes dated quite rapidly. He noted that the master list used to review and keep track of bills for the Town had about 20 or 25 bills on it. Mr. Racy then asked if he could depart from the usual summary and just discuss some MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 critical issues that were going on up there, i.e. municipal tax incentives regarding very large, long-term rebates, sales tax revenues to developers and retail projects that tend to get bid up in competitions between bordering communities; State trust land reform; the regional transportation authority; and franchise agreements with the cable television industry. Mr. Racy concluded his presentation with the invitation for Council to contact him at any time regarding the current status of any legislation. C. MAYOR AND COUNCIL'S REPORT There were no reports. D. MANAGERS' REPORT Mr. Reuwsaat stated that former Town Manager, Mike Hein, had been offered the position of City Manager for the City of Tucson, and offered congratulations and support for Mr. Hein as he moves forward in his career. He also noted that Congressman Kolbe held a Town Hall at the Marana Operations Center on the previous Saturday with well over a hundred people in attendance. Further, he reported on an extensive meeting with State Land with the result that Town staff would be moving forward on perhaps two urban planning processes for property from Saguaro Springs to the BOR park site, and then the main property around the airport. That would allow staff to bring forward an amendment to the General Plan which would positively affect employment opportunities for the community. Jim DeGrood noted that Town staff would be meeting with the Silverbell Action Coalition tomorrow night to make a presentation on Marana efforts to address traffic concerns within the Silverbell corridor. X. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS There were none. IX. ADJOURNMENT A motion to adjourn was made by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member McGorray. The motion carried unanimously. The time being 7:55 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the Marana Town Council meeting held on February 15,2005. I further certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk STUDY SESSION MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 PLACE AND DATE Marana Town Hall, February 15,2005 I. CALL TO ORDER By Council Member Honea at 5:35 p.m. The study session was held informally and no official roll call was given. Vice Mayor Kai and Council Member Escobedo were excused from the study session. Mayor Sutton arrived at 5:40 p.m. All other council members were present and seated at the dais. II. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Presentation: Proposed residential development at The Pines (Barbara Berlin) Barbara Berlin: I am really just introducing Paula Meade from Standard Pacific Homes this evening who will be presenting what you are seeing this evening, which is a concept plan for The Pines Golf Course near Continental Ranch. I have seen some earlier renditions of this. Paula, as you know, has been working with me and several others on developing the residential design standards, which we are still working on, of course. Having some of those in mind, she has been working with the architect, and I will let her explain more about the proposal. Paula Meade, introduced Chris Kemmerly, Tucson division president of Standard Pacific; Gerrie Gray, also at Standard Pacific; John Wood with Presidio Engineering; Mike Grassinger with The Planning Center; and Jeff De Mure, president of Jeffrey De Mure and Associates, who is going to be doing the majority of the presentation tonight. Paula then gave an overview of the proposed residential development at The Pines Golf Course property, hopefully in keeping with the new design standards. She noted that if the proposed plans are received favorably by the Council, Standard Pacific will be required to do a specific plan amendment on the Phase II parcel, including a density transfer, an abandonment of Continental Links Drive, as it used to be known and a few other issues that will change lot sizes, setbacks, and heights of homes. Tonight's presentation is primarily to see if Standard Pacific designs are aligned with the Council's vision. Mr. De Mure, whose credentials include being an architect and a planner, started by applauding Council for taking bold design review steps. Mr. De Mure stated that he premises his work on architecture becoming subservient to a good design when the spirit of the design guidelines and of the community is to, in fact, make a good community. He started with the site plan relative to the golf course, arroyos and mountain views, envisioning them all become a living laboratory of what the desert is all about. The site plan is designed to promote interaction of activities, noting that the entry sequence takes on a special significance because the terminus of that entry sequence is a traffic circle and a recreation center. Mr. De Mure referred to an exhibit to illustrate what that sequence might be, indicating a bridge element to provide circulation for the recreational golfers. He noted that it also becomes a statement to be made because it is the gateway into the additional portion of the community. For MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION FOR DEVELOPMENT AT THE PINES/ IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN HONEA HEIGHTS/ AQUIFER-STORAGE AND LAND-SUBSIDENCE MONITORING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 the balance of the community, they had a variety of lot sizes. He then referred to some other exhibits of various elevations within the projects. Mr. De Mure noted that the architecture was an informal agrarian-inspired architecture. For the 6, 000 square foot lots, the design starts from the curb to the entry and then the front door. The whole concept behind this design was one of transparency, one of accessibility, so that neighbors can go from the divided parkway sidewalk up to the front door unencumbered, and the porch sort of reaches out and embraces the street. The garages were recessed back from the living spaces so there aren't any snout houses that were sort of snarling at the road. The colors reinforce those planes that ascend and recess from the street itself. . He noted that three variations on themes of architecture, territorial, southwestern would be employed in the designs. Some had scuffers -- some had collection boxes and downspouts. These were opportunities to introduce color and vibrancy and the things that make a community what it was. These elements would make each home unique. Mr. De Mure further indicated the process of coalescing the house and site to further enhance the community by varying lot sizes from 32 to 45 feet wide, all on the same street as well as a combination of one- two- and three-story homes within the area. These elements begin to blur the lines between that property line being a straight shot right to the back yard. His staff would like to take this concept and use it for the entire site which would create combinations of different home sites and different housing opportunities for the residents ranging in size from 1,300 to 3,000 square feet. He stated that that makes for a good neighborhood, economic diversity and architectural opportunities creates a variety of different folks that can live in a given neighborhood. Mr. De Mure also pointed out that the biggest garage was a two-car garage. He then provided some statistical data on how the garages were designed, including architecture forward designs. He noted that there would be several single-car garages. A single-car garage, even on a 20-foot- wide home was one-third of the architecture on the streetscape. A three-car garage dominates the streetscape. A two-car garage, when it was a smaller portion of the entire percentage of the home site or the home itself were the kind of elements that add a certain texture and quality to the neighborhood that they were trying to bring. Mr. De Mure continued with his presentation on park sites, safety elements and open space, noting that the designs for the development were meant to integrate with the Council's vision and not compete with existing designs. Council Member Honea raised the issue of three-story homes in the Town of Marana, of which there were none, pointing out that this was a new concept for the Council. He indicated that he did like the design of the buildings and asked for clarification on recessed garages. Mr. De Mure then described the term "architecture forward" and illustrated this design on almost all the homes, varying from 3 to 10 feet, some flush with the porch in the front, some with a two- one-split garage, where there was a side-entry garage and a front-entry garage. On the larger home site, the design incorporates a tandem base to fit three cars. He also addressed the look and MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION FOR DEVELOPMENT AT THE PINES/ IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN HONEA HEIGHTS/ AQUIFER-STORAGE AND LAND-SUBSIDENCE MONITORING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 dimension of a porch to be included in the design. Council Member Honea raised the issue of play areas for children -- basketball courts, tennis courts, and picnic tables and things of that nature. Mr. De Mure indicated that programming of the parks element was not part of the presentation, but that he would be happy to come back before Council with a full rendering once design standards were approved. Ms. Meade concurred that tonight's presentation was conceptual rather than concrete, and that the issues of parks and safety and connectivity to trails and other amenities as well as lot size would have to be discussed during further meetings with staff before requesting Council approval of any design concept. Mayor Sutton also recognized this presentation was to gain an indication of whether the builder was moving in the right direction as opposed to asking for blanket approval of the proposal. He, too, was concerned about pedestrian safety and the attractive element of shopping just across Cortaro that would make pedestrian safety in and out of The Pines a priority. And that there should be some park element located on the north side of Cortaro to avoid hazardous crossing getting to and from the new District Park which would be located on the south side of Cortaro near Silverbell. Mayor Sutton then inquired about the demographic of the buyer of the homes at The Pines. Mr. De Mure first indicated that an emerging group of buyers that represents about 40 percent of all the buyers out there. Right now, 70 percent of the builders build for less than 40 percent of the market. There was a huge demand for a different kind of housing, for a different kind of community. This group was called 'cultural creatives'. They sort of go across the board in terms of age and generation and they don't really conform to any specific demographic of being dual income, no kids or being an empty nest, but there was a variety of ages. Ms. Meade indicated that there was possibility for some rear-load design if they want to go to a higher density, similar to an alley concept. It would, require, possibly, a little narrow street in the front, but they hadn't thrown anything out, other than they were obligated to do 6,000 square foot lots in Phase I. It was zoned for that. In this Phase II, they may respond with a totally different type of layout. Council Member Blake asked if the garages could be put in the rear of the homes. Mr. Meade responded that typically, it doesn't work that way. You either had all the garages in the back or in the front. There was a way to mitigate that garage door with a recessed garage door that doesn't just hang there in front, and you had some other architecture that goes with it. But either you go all rear or all front. Council Member Blake then asked about the concept of having side-entry garages and running a drive down the side of the house with an auto court in the back. Mr. De Mure responded that there could be solutions to that issue. After lengthy discussion on the merit of moving the garages and lot sizes as well as providing a diverse design with wide appeal, and again noting that tonight's presentation was preliminary only, Mayor Sutton indicated that there was enough direction from this Council to give the go- ahead to look at a different concept. MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION FOR DEVELOPMENT AT THE PINES/ IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN HONEA HEIGHTS/ AQUIFER-STORAGE AND LAND-SUBSIDENCE MONITORING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 2. Presentation: Proposed options for roadway improvements within the Honea Heights neighborhood (H. Thomas Gill) Mr. Gill noted that the Town continued to work with the county to get the sewer in there. The next step was how to put streets back together and provide for pedestrian access. He then presented Kevin Thornton, manager of the CIP Engineering division, and a representative from Sage Landscape Architecture and Environmental to present options and cost data for pedestrian improvements in Honea Heights. Mr. Thornton noted that Town staff, with the help of Sage Landscape/Architecture, prepared three alternatives regarding paving of the Honea Heights neighborhood roads following the construction of the proposed sewer system the county was going to be building here this year. The roads within Honea Heights total approximately three miles in length. Bryan Sager, with Sage, was here tonight. He was a licensed architect with Sage and would be able to provide information on the landscaping options that were being presented here. In addition to the three options presented here, they were able to do other variations on those. Town staff would like direction from the Mayor and Council regarding which option to pursue further or variation upon an option. The design of this project would take place concurrently with the construction of the sewer system. Roadway construction of this project would take place following completion of the sewer system, assuming the funding was available. Option one, basically, consists of asphalt paving, curb, and associated drain improvements, sidewalks, and landscaping. The asphalt paving that they were proposing on this was 32 feet in width, which meets the current subdivision street standards. Parking would be allowed on the street with this alternative. The project cost for this option was the most prohibitive at a conservative $5.7 million. Bryan would discuss the landscaping that they were proposing for this option. Option two that they were presenting tonight consisted of asphalt paving that would match the existing widths that were out there, a stabilized, decomposed granite path, as well as landscaping that was not quite as formal as option one. The existing pavement width out in Honea Heights varies from approximately 20 feet to 24 feet. One problem with this option was it would likely limit availability of parking within the right-of-way, due to the narrow street width, and they would be using much of the existing shoulder area today as a pathway as well as landscaping. The project cost estimated for this concept was approximately $1.1 million. Option three, the least expensive of the options, basically consisted of repaving the existing streets. Once the sewer project goes in, the streets were not going to have an asphalt surface until the Town comes back in and replaces that. The cost for this option was estimated at approximately $600,000. Mr. Sager then gave an overview of each of the main options, identifying trees, shrubs and open spaces on each - formal and informal plantings. He also noted that the ground treatment could be asphalt, left natural or with some decomposed granite spread, which was standard. Council Member McGorray asked about the option with the decomposed granite, stating that she MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION FOR DEVELOPMENT AT THE PINES/ IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN HONEA HEIGHTS/ AQUIFER-STORAGE AND LAND-SUBSIDENCE MONITORING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 noticed only two shrubs between the walkway and the street. Would the planting be continued all the way So the walkway wasn't right adjacent to the street? Mr. Thornton responded that with this option, there was the ability to meander the walkway as well as further down there were a few more plantings, but they were hard to see at this distance. Between the road and the pathway, they want to keep the shrubs low, but there would be shrubs there. The decomposed granite would be similar to what you see along Dove Mountain Blvd. After a general discussion regarding sidewalks and public meetings regarding the streets in Honea Heights, Council Member Comerford asked how on-street parking would be necessary. Council Member Honea responded that most of the lots in Honea Heights were large, varying from about 15,000 feet to a half acre. On the east end of the neighborhood, the lots were fairly large in general, so there was not a lot of need for on-street parking or for vegetation as there was a lot of vegetation existing there now. That would eliminate about $275,000. Mr. Thornton noted that one of the things that added to the cost was curbing, and they had to deal with drainage a lot more than if they leave it as it exists today. They could do a sidewalk option with this for not too much more. There was a difference between the DG and the sidewalk, but it was not a huge difference as far as cost goes. Mayor Sutton asked for a cost per item on the options. The costs of additional right-of-way were pretty expensive too. He also inquired as to what promises had been made to the residents without requiring Council approval. Mr. Barr noted that there wasn't a hard promise for sidewalks. They talked about the opportunity to go in there. They had always talked about when you go in and you move the new sewage system in there, they had the opportunity to re-build that neighborhood. That was what they were talking about right here. If the costs were minimal between DG versus asphalt versus concrete sidewalks, you can go with the concrete and put them on one side. Mayor Sutton: I think they can work something out, so look at the cost per item that they were talking about on these, break it down. When that comes back to our agenda and they start meeting more, they would figure it out. 3. Presentation: AQuifer-Storal!e and Land-Subsidence Monitorinl! in the Tucson Active Manal!ement Area Report (Brad DeSpain): Mr. DeSpain introduced David L. Schmerge and John Hoffman from the US Geological Survey, noting that the Town had become cooperators with other water entities in the Tucson region and basin to do a land subsidence monitoring and Aquifer-Storage. Mr. Schmerge described an overview of the using gravity measurements. Noting that this was the first time he had presented any information to Council, he also spent some time describing the equipment. The goal of the presentation to Council was to look at the storage changes that they had seen in MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION FOR DEVELOPMENT AT THE PINES/ IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN HONEA HEIGHTS/ AQUIFER-STORAGE AND LAND-SUBSIDENCE MONITORING MARANA TOWN HALL FEBRUARY 15,2005 the Tucson basin, including Marana, over the last couple years. I am, also, going to show you the results for land subsidence as well. Generally speaking, what they were seeing in Tucson basin, especially in the northwestern part, was where they predominately seeing the largest storage changes over the several years, including the area of Marana that they were looking at. If I recall, they need the map to see how large the area was, but they saw 100,000 acre-feet of storage loss in the northwestern part of Tucson basin, which would be, for that study area, about half a foot of loss per year. In Avra Valley, on the other hand, for the northern and central part, they were seeing storage increases. For Marana itself, they saw both the largest storage loss, which was in the Tucson basin loss, but they also saw the largest storage increase in the study area, which was at the airport in Avra Valley. There were several re-charge facilities there. The single largest loss was near the Santa Cruz River. There was an equipment malfunction, and Mayor Sutton asked if, in the interest of time, Mr. Schmerge could bring his presentation back the following week. III. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Sutton adjourned the meeting at 6:45 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the study session held on February 15,2005. I further certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk TOWN OF MARANA STUDY SESSION 13251 N. LON ADAMS ROAD FEBRUARY 22, 2005, 5:30 P.M. PLACE AND DATE Marana Town Hall, February 22, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER By Vice Mayor Kai at 5:35 p.m. The study session was held informally and no official roll call was given. Mayor Sutton was excused from the study session. All Council Members were present and seated at the dais. II. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Presentation: Aquifer-Storage and Land-Subsidence Monitoring in the Tucson Active Management Area Report (Continued from the meeting of February 15, 2005) (Brad DeSpain) Brad DeSpain addressed the Council and introduced David Schmerge of the U.S. Geological Survey. Mr. Schmerge noted that Marana had joined the monitoring program in 2003 and his presentation focused on the results since then. Mr. Schmerge stated that the practical reasons for monitoring were resource management and scientific evaluation. Groundwater depletion causes land subsidence. Gravity measurements are used to measure aquifer storage. Elevation is also a major factor. He gave a brief explanation of the equipment that was used to gather the data. He showed the Council where the tests were completed from Spring 2003 to Spring 2004 and explained the map to the Council. He stated that overall, the rate of loss was about the same - half a foot, and that loss over the entire area and the average loss was half a foot. The loss for the past couple of years had remained about the same, but steadily decreasing. In central and northern A vra Valley there was a storage gain; in southern Avra Valley, where Tucson Water was pumping, there was a storage loss. Overall, it was a gain of about 70,000 acre feet. Mr. Schmerge indicated to Council where the subsidence was occurring. Tucson Water had greatly reduced the pumping of the central well-field so that it was possible that in time there would be an increase in that area. If groundwater depletion was stopped, the subsidence would be reduced. He explained that there was room for more coverage in Avra Valley and that in the future they would look at the area more closely. He indicated that there was a surge in the area of the Pima Mine Recharge facility. Discussion was held about the Cortaro area and the level there. Mr. Schmerge did not have an answer as to why there was so much depletion in that area. 2. Presentation: Vanderbilt Farms Community Facilities District (Roy Cuaron) Mr. Cuaron addressed the Council and gave a brief introduction. He said that this item was intended come before the Council on March 15,2005. He noted that the applicants had experience in developing master planned communities. The area is approximately 491 acres, and the infrastructure was expected to be phased in over 15 years. The cost of 1 TOWN OF MARANA STUDY SESSION 13251 N. LON ADAMS ROAD FEBRUARY 22,2005,5:30 P.M. the public infrastructure is estimated to be about $10.5 million. Staff would seek a bond authorization for about three times that amount. The Council could expect to see a development agreement similar to Gladden Farms. Mr. Reuwsaat asked Mr. Barr to address the public good regarding this project. Mr. Barr noted that the Council had indicated to staff that it was important to get the infrastructure and public roadwork in a timely fashion, in order to avoid situations somewhat like Cortaro Road. The idea of the Community Facilities District was to accelerate the work. The application was tentatively scheduled for 2006. Discussion was held about the costs that a homeowner would have to pay and how they would be paid - rather than in a mortgage it would be paid in the property tax. It would take the value of the infrastructure out of the house price and into the bond price. There could be a question of tangible benefit and what the residents would actually get for what they were paying for. 3. Presentation of Cortaro-Silverbell District Park and Gladden Farms Neighborhood Park Master Plan (Ron Smith) Mr. Smith addressed the Council and gave a brief introduction, indicating that staff was at the master planning stage for both of the parks. The first was Cortaro and Silverbell, which was very similar to what they had in the past, with the exception that due to archaeological reasons, one side would be left alone. There would be four ball fields, two soccer fields, a group ramada area, open turf, a dog park, a splash park, and open area for if they decided to build a multigenerational recreation center there. Mr. Smith responded to questions and explained what a splash park was. It would be built on a non-slip surface. The kids could play there rather than a swimming pool. Mr. Reuwsaat said that there would be about 450 parking spots; he also pointed out the library site. Mr. Smith said that the construction drawings would take six to nine months to complete; with funding they would be able to start moving the last quarter of fiscal year 2005-2006. Mr. Reuwsaat explained that they still do not have the Corps of Engineers permit. They were presently working on the archeological verification, and staff was looking at other avenues to finance the park. Mr. Smith explained that the Master Plan for Gladden Farms was before the Council also. He said that the park was very simple but also useful. There were a couple of multi-use parks, tot lots, playgrounds, several groves of trees, and restrooms. They were meeting the Town's needs that were part of the Master Planned Santa Cruz Linear Park. Eventually, the Santa Cruz Trail would go all the way through the park. He clarified that the ball fields were not lighted. If they chose to have the fields lighted it would be at the Town's expense and would have to go in before the houses were built. Mr. Smith responded to questions from the Council and said that there were not basketball courts but that there would be ramadas. Mr. Barr pointed out that Gladden Farms had pocket parks in the subdivisions where there were things like basketball courts. Mr. Reuwsaat pointed out that there would be additional transportation infrastructure at the west end. Council Member Honea pointed out that the number one activity he had noticed was basketball. He did not want to have to go back later and upgrade the park. Council 2 TOWN OF MARANA STUDY SESSION 13251 N. LON ADAMS ROAD FEBRUARY 22, 2005, 5:30 P.M. Member Comerford suggested that they really scrutinize the park. There was nothing wrong with the Town of Marana going back and saying that they also wanted other things. Council Member Honea expressed concerns that this park did not offer enough amenities. Mr. Smith responded to questions and said that Little League ran exclusively at Ora Mae Harn Park. In the future they would have to go to other parks. Council Member Escobedo pointed out that this was preliminary and Gladden Farms had been willing to work with the Town. He said that they could always add amenities. Council Member Blake asked if this was a 40-acre park; Mr. Smith estimated that this was 20-25 acres. Mr. Reuwsaat informed the Council that 6 acres of park were required for every 1,000 residents by the current standards. He said that they would have other opportunities in the immediate area to provide for the other activities. Mr. Reuwsaat explained that staff was looking at increased impact fees for parks and roads for future development of parks. The sooner the impact fee ordinance was approved the sooner the funding would be available. Mr. Smith explained that Gladden Farms' commitment to the Town was as seen. Planning and Parks staff would be working together to look at parcels where they could build the 40 acre parks. 4. Presentation: DeGrood) Regional Transportation Project Priorities for Marana (Jim Mr. DeGrood addressed the Council and presented a slide show that he had previously given at the Regional Transportation Authority's Technical and Management Subcommittee. The committee had requested that every jurisdiction do this. He said that he presented to the committee that the Council had already identified the regional routes. He identified specifically the Twin Peaks Corridor, Tangerine Road, Thornydale Road, Ina Road, Avra Valley Road and Marana Road. These were shown on PAG's five-year program. He briefly explained each of the priorities to the Council. He wanted to make sure that they knew that the Town expected to contribute over $170 million to the projects. Mr. Reuwsaat stated that most of the other jurisdictions were looking at roadway improvements for existing deficiencies. The Town's needs were significantly different. He felt reasonably confident that these were the high priorities that would meet most of the future needs. What they would need to present to the electorate was a sense of the projects that would have an immediate benefit if it went to the voters in May 2006. They were going to focus on the first four projects and then later would look at the other projects. They would bring back before Council a list of final projects. This was the first attempt to show what was on the Town's plate. Staff would update the Council once or twice more during the process. Additional discussion was held on the funding and growth of the Town of Mar ana. 5. Discussion of options for a non-smoking ordinance (Mike Reuwsaat) Mr. Reuwsaat addressed the Council and said that work had previously been done on smoking ordinances and staff had looked at what was done in the community. He said that the example Council had before them was Pima County's smoking ordinance. 3 TOWN OF MARANA STUDY SESSION 13251 N. LON ADAMS ROAD FEBRUARY 22,2005,5:30 P.M. Staff had gone through and reformatted the ordinance to bullet the separate sections. He explained Pima County's ordinance and listed some exemptions. He discussed the ordinance as it related to restaurants. One issue was that they did not want the Police to have to enforce the smoking ordinance. He said that they could do an IGA and have the County's health department enforce the ordinance, subject to approval. Discussion was held about the hardship phase. Less than 30% of the restaurants in the Town of Marana were allowing smoking. Discussion was held about Cracker Barrel Restaurant and the smoking area. Mr. Barr said that staff would want to go back to the beginning and get a feel from the business community once direction was received from the Council. Council Member Honea suggested that the first step, since they would be looking into an IGA with Pima County for enforcement it would be a good idea to keep the IGA similar to the County's to facilitate enforcement. Mr. Reuwsaat said staff would move forward at this point and go forward to the Chamber of Commerce and businesses for input. I. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Council Member Escobedo, seconded by Council Member McGorray, the motion to adjourn was approved unanimously, and Vice Mayor Kai adjourned the meeting at 7:00 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the study session held on February 22, 2005. I further certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk 4 MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 1, 2005 PLACE AND DATE Marana Town Hall, March 1, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER By Mayor Sutton at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Mayor Sutton III. INVOCA TION/MOMENT OF SILENCE A moment of silence was observed. IV. ROLL CALL COUNCIL Bobby Sutton, Jr. Herb Kai Jim Blake Patti Comerford Tim Escobedo Ed Honea Carol McGorray ST AFF Mike Reuwsaat J aret Barr Frank Cassidy Jocelyn Bronson Jim DeGrood Richard Vidaurri Mayor Vice Mayor Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Present Present Present Excused Present Present Present Town Manager Present Interim Development Services Administration Present Town Attorney Present Town Clerk Present Executive Assistant to Town Manager Present Chief of Police Present Attached is a list of public attendees. V. APPROV AL OF AGENDA Upon motion by Council Member Escobedo, seconded by Council Member McGorray, the agenda was unanimously approved. VI. ACCEPT ANCE OF MINUTES There were no minutes submitted for Council approval. VII. CALL TO THE PUBLICI ANNOUNCEMENTS Jane Howell addressed the Council and said Lisa Jones, HR Manager, would introduce the newest Human Resources employee. She distributed a brochure MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 1, 2005 that he had put together for job fairs. Lisa Jones introduced Tommy Yamasaki, Human Resources Analyst. He started work on January 24, 2005. Tommy is working on a master's degree. He came to Marana from private industry; he had also worked for the University of Arizona. Ron Smith addressed the Council and gave an update on the Founder's Day Event, March 18 through March 20, beginning with the Marana timed rodeo. The title sponsor is Northwest Hospital; Wells Fargo Bank, a contributing sponsor, will bring their stage coach which Council Members can ride on. Entertainment starts at noon and lasts until 8:00 pm. Sunday there will be barrel racing and mounted shooters. Mayor Sutton asked if he was introducing a new employee. Mr. Smith said that Kristy Diaz- Trahan, the new recreation superintendent, would be introduced at the next Council meeting. Mike Mencinger addressed the Council and introduced a new employee, Patrick Cochran. Mr. Cochran introduced himself to the Council. He had been a resident of Marana for 23 years and would be bringing expertise in the field of HV AC. Jocelyn Bronson addressed the Council and introduced a new employee, Tim Mattix, the new Records and Elections Coordinator. He comes from the City of Tucson and is working on revamping the records management process. Mayor Sutton noted that there will be a Town election March 8, 2005. The Council Members in the election, with their strong history, vision and support from the community, would be running unopposed, but that referendum was based on the previous vote, and he urged residents to vote and support the community. The Town Clerk addressed the Council and said she had flyers of the polling locations in Marana for distribution after the meeting. She said she had been doing some voter outreach at various civic meetings. VIII. STAFF REPORTS There were no staff reports. IX. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. CONSENT AGENDA There were no consent items presented to the Council for consideration. B. COUNCIL ACTION 1. For information only: Announcing the Marana Police Department's MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 1, 2005 participation in a multi-disciplinary Drug Enforcement Administration Tucson Task Force by the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding with the United States Department of Justice. (Richard Vidaurri) Chief Vidaurri addressed the Council and announced that Marana had been asked to participate in the Drug Enforcement Tucson Task Force. Marana would lose an individual for a three-year assignment, but would gain a tremendous amount of training and an additional squad, if not a number of individual officers, from around the City that would be part of the project. 2. For information only: Announcing the award to the Marana Police Department of a law enforcement block grant from the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (Richard Vidaurri) Chief Vidaurri addressed the Council and said the Marana Police Department had been awarded a grant from the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission in the amount of $4,286. They were now part of the Northwest Expansion Victim Witness Program of the Pima County Attorney's Office, and would use the grant money to purchase one of the digital radios currently in use. 3. Resolution No. 2005-24: Relating to Police; approving and authorizing the execution of an Intergovernmental Agreement with Pima County concerning a Regional Special Weapons and Tactics Team. (Richard Vidaurri) Chief Vidaurri addressed the Council and said that the Marana Police Department would be participating in the Pima County Regional Special Weapons and Tactic Team (SWATT). In the past it had been difficult for small agencies to get funding to develop their own SWAT team. This would be the largest SWAT team in Southern Arizona. There were over 100 members from around the County. This showed the partnership that Marana had involved itself in in the community. The Marana Police Department had assigned four members to the team but would gain an additional 100 members to respond to a major crisis within the Town limits. Town Manager Reuwsaat asked if there were four officers assigned to it. Chief Vidaurri answered that three officers and one supervisor would be assigned. Council Member Escobedo asked if those officers assigned to the unit would continue working in Marana. Chief Vidaurri answered that SWAT participation came secondary to actual duty, to answer calls for service. MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 1, 2005 Upon motion by Council Member McGorray, seconded by Council Member Escobedo, Resolution No. 2005-24 was unanimously approved. 4. Resolution No. 2005-23: Relating to Sales Tax; authorizing reimburse- ment to Pima County of Town of Marana sales tax for the purchase and installation of a package wastewater treatment plant for the Marana wastewater management facility. (Roy Cuaron) Mr. Reuwsaat addressed the Council and said that Pima County had issued an award for the purchase of a needed packaged wastewater treatment plant. They asked for a waiver on construction sales tax to cut the cost for them. Staff would research the sales tax actually paid and received by the Town for the purchase/installation of that plant. This was for the benefit of the citizens, and a part of the good relationship with Pima County. Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member Blake, Resolution No. 2005-23 was unanimously approved. 5. Ordinance No. 2005.08; Relating to Annexation; extending and increasing the corporate limits of the Town of Marana, Arizona, by annexing certain Cortaro Farms Road right-of-way located adjacent to existing Town limits and between Cerius Stravenue and the centerline of Hartman Lane in Section 26, Township 12 South, Range 12 East, Gila and Salt River Meridian. (Frank Cassidy) Frank Cassidy addressed the Council and said this annexation of Pima County right-of-way was on Cortaro Farms Road, between the railroad tracks and Hartman Lane. This would facilitate the construction of the roadway. Upon motion by Council Member McGorray, seconded by Council Member Blake, Ordinance No. 2005.08 was unanimously approved. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance No. 2005.09: Relating to Development; rezoning 845 acres of land from IfR-144" to zone ifF" and creating the Sanders Grove Specific Plan on property located east of Sanders Road, south of Hardin Road, east of Kirby Hughes and north of Marana Road. (Barbara Berlin) Barbara Berlin addressed the Council and said this item rezoned 845 acres from R-144 to F and created the Sanders Grove Specific Plan. This item had been continued from the meeting of December 21, 2004 due to transportation and traffic issues as well as residential design. Both of those issues had been addressed. For transportation, Kirby Hughes Road had been reinstated from Wentz Road to the 1-10 Frontage road. There would MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 1, 2005 be a third party review of the proposed street layout in coordination with the town center planning completed before any plats were issued. The residential standards were expanded and embellished thoroughly. She recommended that item 21 be removed from the proposed ordinance because the developer was entering into a voluntary agreement with Marana Unified School District. Mayor Sutton asked if anyone wished to speak. Seeing no one he moved the public hearing opened and closed. Council Member Honea asked if he should modify the motion to include the revisions. Jaret Barr addressed the Council and explained that the Council had revisions before them. The revisions as a whole could be mentioned in the motion. Council Member Honea said he wanted to add participation in affordable housing. The Council and senior staff had talked about affordable housing and about large developers including a specific number of affordable housing in their projects. He wanted to put a fee on each lot for the affordable housing and community development program. The fee would go to the older communities that would be surrounded by the new, massive developments. They would collect the revenue and buy lots or purchase houses that needed to be refurbished through a non-profit organization to help upgrade older communities. Mr. Barr answered that staff could bring forward a study or some material based on other affordable housing programs throughout the region and the country. Staff had discussed ways to provide incentives to build more affordable housing in the area, to make sure that families that had lived in the area for generations would be able to stay. A clause could be added to the motion that though the specific plan was approved they were not precluded from the fee or study in the future. Mr. Reuwsaat addressed the Council and said this would be town-wide, and would allow staff to update neighborhoods that were contiguous or close to the projects. Michael Racy, on behalf of Diamond Ventures, addressed the Council and said that Diamond Ventures was willing to work with the Town of Marana on a community wide application of affordable housing. Mayor Sutton asked the Town Attorney if the verbiage was clear. Mr. Cassidy said they needed to add something that said nothing about the approval would keep the Town from applying a new affordable housing program to the plan. MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 1, 2005 Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member McGorray, Ordinance No. 2005.09, with the inclusion of the revisions and the verbiage regarding the affordable housing program and the removal of condition 21, was unanimously approved. 7. Resolution No. 2005-25: Relating to Capital Improvement Projects; approving and authorizing the Loan Repayment Agreement between the Arizona Transportation Board and the Town of Marana for Project No. 2002-58; Thornydale Road, Orange Grove Road to the Canada del Oro Wash (Harvey Gill) Harvey Gill addressed the Council and said that the Public Works Department had applied to the Arizona Transportation Board for a help loan in the amount of $7 million to advance the construction of Thornydale Road. The principal and interest repayment would be made over a five- year period with two payments per year. The Town had successfully programmed $6.8 in the tip toward repayment of the principal. The remaining principal and interest would occur in the CIP over the next five years. The interest would be approximately $616,000 based on an interest rate of 3.5% and the unpaid balance each time a loan payment was made. The interest rate was based on 3.5%, but he understood that the interest rate when it closed would be less than 3.5%. Mr. Reuwsaat said this was part of the five-year transportation program the Council had approved. Mr. Gill said the plans would be completed this year and the notice to proceed would go out January 2, 2006. Upon motion by Vice Mayor Kai, seconded by Council Member Blake, Resolution No. 2005-25 was unanimously approved. 8. Resolution No. 2005-17: Relating to Development; approving a Preliminary Plat for Ina and Silverbell (Barbara Berlin) Barbara Berlin addressed the Council and said the subdivision was at the southwest corner of Ina and Silverbell. The Planning Commission recommended approval on December 15, 2004. Vice Mayor Kai asked if it was a septic system or part of Pima County's system. Ms. Berlin answered that they would be hooked up to the County. Vice Mayor Kai asked if the streets would continue to carry through or if that would be addressed later. Mr. Reuwsaat answered that the neighbors did not want that access. This was a requirement to meet the needs of the adjacent neighborhoods. MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 1, 2005 Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member McGorray, Resolution No. 2005-17 was unanimously approved. 9. Resolution No. 2005-21: Relating to Development; approving a Preliminary Plat for Gladden Farms Block 21 (Barbara Berlin) Ms. Berlin addressed the Council and said the Planning Commission recommended approval on January 26, 2005. Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member Blake, Resolution No. 2005-21 was unanimously approved. 10. Resolution No. 2005-22: Relating to Development; approving a Preliminary Plat for Gladden Farms Block 2 (Barbara Berlin) Barbara Berlin addressed the Council and said the Planning Commission recommended approval on December 15, 2004. Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member McGorray, Resolution No. 2005-22 was unanimously approved. Mr. Reuwsaat informed the Council that these blocks were part of phase II of Gladden Farms. Staff would have discussions with Vanderbilt Farms to look at interim improvements. There were numerous meetings to expedite the loop road being built. 11. State Legislative Issues: DiscussionfDirectionf Action regarding all pending bills before the Legislature (Mike Reuwsaat) Mr. Reuwsaat reported that the referendum bill was moving through. There was additional legislation to raise court fines and take 75% of the increase from the Town. Mayor Sutton asked if the Council needed to know anything now. Mr. Racy answered that the referendum signature bill was moving to caucus and the floor fairly soon. The television franchise bill slowed down but was still a problem. The RT A bill that targeted the Southern Arizona RT A was never heard. c. MAYOR AND COUNCIL'S REPORT Council Member Escobedo reported that a group of international facility managers met at the new municipal complex. They had toured what was completed. MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 1, 2005 D. MANAGERS' REPORT Mr. Reuwsaat reported that the courts and police moved in to the new facility, and the employee morale escalated with the new work environment. He said that he, Brad DeSpain, Frank Cassidy, and an outside attorney would be meeting with ABWR staff on cap allocation and would then go to Phoenix to talk about the assured water supply and replenishment issues related to the non-potable water system. He said that Vern Swaback would be having meetings at Dove Mountain, in northern Marana, and at Continental Ranch to discuss and get community input on the Town Center. Council Member Escobedo recommended people drive down Civic Center Drive to get an idea of what it would look like when completed. X. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS There were none. XI. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Council Member Escobedo, seconded by Council Member McGorray, approval to adjourn was unanimous. The time was 7:42 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the Marana Town Council meeting held on March 1, 2005. I further certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn Bronson, Town Clerk TOWN OF MARANA STUDY SESSION MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 12, 2005 PLACE AND DATE Marana Town Hall, March 12,2005. I. CALL TO ORDER By Mayor Sutton at 9:20 a.m. The study session was held informally and no official roll call was given. II. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Proposed Residential Design Standards discussion and Town Center Planning discussion by Vern Swaback & Associates Mr. Reuwsaat introduced the topics for consideration at the study session and noted that both items agendized would be discussed concurrently as one item. According to Mr. Reuwsaat, the purpose the study session was to present options and then solidify what Council wants to see occur with residential design standards. Then the consultant would redraft what is currently before Council and bring it back for further review and discussion. Mayor Sutton reiterated that the study session was to resolve what Council likes and doesn't like in terms of building design for the town core as well as for all future developments in Marana. At this time, Vern Swaback recapped the history of his experience with standards and developer interests. Mr. Swaback stressed that Council's vision will represent commitment to the future; Council must direct the path of growth, not vice versa. What must dominate is a long-term vision of a sustainable community, noting that the demands of the community include diversity. Another factor should be to provide shared amenities, which can lower costs but not quality. Jeff Denzak, an associate with Swaback & Associates, further emphasized that agreed-upon standards are the foundation for future progress. The Swaback presentation focused on ideas to help bring the Council's VISlOn together to eliminate the standard production house of all street-fronted garages and to integrate creativity into the unique community. The proposed standards would incorporate parks and open spaces into the overall design rather than use leftover or unusable parcels for park sites. Other features of the sustainable community plan included paths and trails to link neighborhoods and perimeter landscaping and walls as part of buffer zones that screen properties. Streetscapes and vehicle and pedestrian circulation patterns were also addressed as a necessary component to design standards. Further discussion was held regarding the need to prevent houses from looking boxy. Mr. Barr indicated that there was discrepancy between the elevations and the floor-plans which needed to be addressed. At this point in the session, Ms. Berlin indicated that staff must now deal with some important internal management issues in terms of when they would have an ordinance to go to public hearing. Mr. Reuwsaat said there was no reason they couldn't have them (consultants and developers) work with staff. It would be tough to come to a prescriptive set of standards where a TOWN OF MARANA STUDY SESSION MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 12,2005 developer could come in and determine whether or not it would work. It was further noted that with the first few projects especially they would have to put the resources to it to make sure they were done right. As part of the issues they had identified it would include more information in terms of the architectural components so that they would have examples of what not to do. Mr. Reuwsaat said that they went with the NRP A standard. The concept was a combination of smaller nodes and the larger regional. The bottom line was that they would have to look at the standards. Mr. Denzak summarized the study session, noting that Swaback would provide the Town with copies of to day's information, of the consensus questions that the group agreed with, and they would continue to work with Town Staff as well as developers if requested. They would have a meeting coming up that would include information on Town Center elements such as transportation corridors. III. ADJOURNMENT The study session concluded by unanimous consent at 11 :40 a.ill. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the study session held on February 15, 2005. I further certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 15, 2005 PLACE AND DATE Marana Town Hall, March 15,2005 I. CALL TO ORDER By Mayor Sutton at 7:01 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Mayor Sutton III. INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE A moment of silence was observed. IV. ROLL CALL COUNCIL Bobby Sutton, Jr. Herb Kai Jim Blake Patti Comerford Tim Escobedo Ed Honea Carol McGorray Mayor Vice Mayor Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Present Excused Present Present Present Present Present STAFF Mike Reuwsaat Jaret Barr Frank Cassidy Jocelyn Bronson Town Manager Asst. Town Manager Town Attorney Town Clerk Attached is a list of public attendees. V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Upon motion by Council Member Escobedo, seconded by Council Member McGorray, the agenda was unanimously approved. VI. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES Upon motion by Council Member Comerford, seconded by Council Member Blake, the minutes of the January 18,2005 Study and Regular Sessions were unanimously approved. VII. CALL TO THE PUBLIC - ANNOUNCEMENTS - INTRODUCTIONS - UPCOMING EVENTS Ron Smith, Parks and Recreation Director, addressed the Council and introduced Kristy Diaz- Trahan, the new Recreation Superintendent. Ms. Diaz- Trahan came to the Town from New Mexico after 10 years there specializing in children's programming. She had also been an 1 MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 15, 2005 administrative deputy and had worked with seniors. Ms. Diaz- Trahan said she was excited to be back in Arizona and to be in a small growing community. She looked forward to meeting every one of the Council and to being part of the community in Marana. Ora Mae addressed the Council and spoke about the America Walk for diabetes, asking for team captains for the Walk, noting that the Town of Marana was one of the sponsors. The walk would be April 23, 2005 at 7:30 a.m. in Heritage Highlands. She left information with the Town Clerk. Ed Stolmaker, executive director of the Marana Chamber, introduced Jay Schwartz, president of the Marana Chamber of Commerce. He introduced Man of the Year, Robert Condit, noting that Mr. Condit had dedicated much of the last 30 years by sitting on Boards and attending Council meetings. He had worked to help Marana be a better place to live. Mr. Schwartz then introduced Debbie Schmich, Woman of the Year, noting her many roles within Marana education over the past 18 years. Mayor Sutton said that they would also be making mention of the 2005 Man and Woman of the Year at the Founder's Day Celebration. VIII. STAFF REPORTS There were no questions regarding staff reports. IX. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution No. 2005-25: Relating to Development; approving a release of assurances for Sonoran Vista and acceptance of public improvements for maintenance (Keith Brann) 2. Resolution No. 2005-26: Relating to Development; authorizing the Town Manager to execute a partial release document, releasing the proposed M & I Bank site from the Real Estate Exchange and Development agreement recorded December 19, 2003 (Frank Cassidy) 3. Resolution No. 2005-33: Relating to Elections; adopting the results of the primary election held March 8, 2005 (Jocelyn Bronson) Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member Escobedo, the consent agenda was unanimously approved. B. THE COUNCIL SITTING AS THE MARANA 1-10 COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 1. Marana 1-10 Communitv Facilities District Resolution No. 2005-01: Relating to Development; authorizing the dissolution of the District Board of the Marana 1-10 Community Facilities District (Frank Cassidy) Mr. Cassidy addressed the Council and briefly introduced the item. He explained that this item authorized the dissolution of the district, which was created in 1989 and hadn't 2 MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 15, 2005 been active since its inception. He noted that this was a clean up item that would allow the creation of another district in the same vicinity. Upon motion by Council Member McGorray, seconded by Council Member Comerford, Marana 1-10 Community Facilities District Resolution No. 2005-01 was unanimously approved. C. COUNCIL ACTION 1. Resolution No. 2005-31: A resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Marana determining that the Marana 1-10 Community Facilities District has been inactive for at least five years and has no future purpose and assuming, to the extent not otherwise prohibited by applicable law, all of the obligations of the Marana 1-10 Community Facilities District, all pursuant to A.R.S. §4-701 et seq. (Frank Cassidy) (This item was agendized as Resolution No. 2005-32; however, a discrepancy between the agenda language and the resolution and subsequent motion required amending the number on the dais from Resolution No. 2005-32 to Resolution No. 2005-31). Mr. Cassidy explained that this resolution allowed the Town to act on the item. Upon motion by Council Member McGorray, seconded by Council Member Council Member Comerford, Resolution No. 2005-31 was unanimously approved. 2. Resolution No. 2005-29: Relating to Housing; approving and authorizing the execution of an intergovernmental agreement between the Town of Marana and Pima County for the construction of public sanitary sewers in the Honea Heights Colonia (Frank Cassidy) Mr. Reuwsaat addressed the Council and gave a brief introduction of this item, stating that this was an intergovernmental agreement related to the construction of sewers in Honea Heights. He noted that this item went back several years to when the County had received a grant to extend sewers throughout the community. The Town's obligation was several: to go in and pave and do the sidewalks. That would be brought back to the Council as a separate item. The Town would pay $180,000 for the sewer hook-ups; the County would pay the remaining balance. The Town did have the right to review the bids with the County. The Town would be pay the difference between what the successful bid came out. Upon motion by Council Member Escobedo, seconded by Council Member Honea, Resolution No. 2005-29 was unanimously approved. 3. Resolution No. 2005-30: Relating to Real Estate: authorizing the approving an agreement for the use and transfer of a modular building to the Marana Health Center (Frank Cassidy) Mr. Cassidy addressed the Council and said that the real estate referred to in this item had been the former Police department administrative building, would be used by the Marana Health Center. As long as they used it for at least 10 years for community health services they would have use of it for no cost because of the benefit to the community. Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member Blake, Resolution 2005-30 was unanimously approved. 3 MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 15, 2005 4. Relatinl! to Personnel: approving and authorizing the creation of a hiring pool to ensure full Police Officer staffing (Jane Howell) Mr. Reuwsaat addressed the Council and gave an overview of the item, noting that Marana currently had six openings and that it took at least 9 months from the time that someone was hired to the time that they started. The pool would allow Marana to over- hire and have police officers trained with the understanding that they would end up filling the position. This would allow for full staffing of the department. Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member McGorray, the motion to approve and authorize the creation of a hiring pool of five police officers was unanimously approved. 5. Resolution No. 2005-32: Relating to Development; approving a preliminary Plat for Oasis Hills (Barbara Berlin) (This item was agendized as Resolution No. 2005-31; however, it was changed on the dais to resolve a numbering issue with Item C.1.) Ms. Berlin addressed the Council and gave a brief introduction to the Oasis Hills subdivision. The land was annexed in the Town in 1987; the specific plan was adopted in 1988, along with the abutting Northgate Specific Plan adopted in 1991. They would be combined into one plan known as Cascada. This plat was within the entitlements of the original specific plan and would be incorporated into the new plan. Mr. Reuwsaat addressed the Council and noted that this project had been whittled down to what was before the Council. The disturbance percentage was low. Council Member Honea asked if two specific plans were being combined. Ms. Berlin answered that this was the applicant's intent. The new specific plan would have its own design standards. Mr. Reuwsaat clarified that the applicant would be subject to the new standards. This was a plat that was part of the old specific plat that had been in the works for a year. This would be the last the Council would see of the old specific plan. Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member McGorray, Resolution No. 2005-32 was unanimously approved. 6. Resolution No. 2005-27: Relating to Development; approving a preliminary plat for Gladden Farms Block 17 (Barbara Berlin) Ms. Berlin addressed the Council and gave a brief introduction to Gladden Farms Block 17. There is not yet a builder selected for the plat, but once a builder is selected, staff will review for conformance. Upon motion by Council Member Honea, seconded by Council Member Blake, Resolution No. 2005-27 was unanimously approved. 7. Resolution No. 2005-28: Relating to Development; approving a preliminary plat for Gladden Farms Blocks 18 and 20 (Barbara Berlin) 4 MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 15, 2005 Ms. Berlin addressed the Council and gave a brief introduction to Gladden Farms Blocks 18 and 20. There was no discussion. Upon motion by Council Member McGorray, seconded by Council Member Honea, Resolution No. 2005-28 was unanimously approved. 8. Executive Sessions pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) and (4) to consult with and instruct the Town's attorneys regarding (a) negotiations with the City of Tucson and Flowing Wells Irrigation District (FWID) concerning the Town's pending application before the Arizona Department of Water Resources for transfer of 1,500 acre feet of FWID's excess Central Arizona Project allocation, (b) negotiations with the City of Tucson concerning a proposed intergovernmental agreement governing the ownership and use of effluent generated at metropolitan sewer treatment plants as the result of water deliveries from the Town of Marana water utility, and (c) legal implications relating to assured water supply designation, replenishment obligations, water rights and the like arising out of the delivery of water through the Town's non-potable water system (Frank Cassidy) Upon motion by Council Member Comerford, seconded by Council Member McGorray, the motion to go into executive session was unanimously approved. The time was 7:35 p.m. The Council returned to regular session at 8: 10 p.m. 9. State Lel!islative Issues: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending bills before the Legislature (Mike Reuwsaat) There was no additional report. X. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Sutton noted that the study session held on March 12,2005, had been a good opportunity to get another overview of the design review standards, and that he thought it had been a good seSSlOn. XI. MANAGERS' REPORT Mr. Reuwsaat reported that three important dates were upcoming: April 19 would be a regular council meeting held at Heritage Highlands; May 3 would be the official dedication of the new municipal complex, to be held directly after the regular Council meeting; and May 17 was the alternative expenditure limitation election, which was very important to the continued operation of the Town. XII. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS XIII. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Council Member Escobedo, seconded by Council Member Blake, the motion to adjourn was unanimously approved. The time was 8: 12 p.m. 5 MINUTES OF REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MARANA TOWN HALL MARCH 15, 2005 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the Marana Town Council meeting held on March 15,2005. I further certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn Bronson, Town Clerk 6 TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: April 5,2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. A. 1 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2005-35: Relating to Parks and Recreation; ap- proving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an intergovernmen- tal agreement with Pima County for the Marana Cultural and Heritage Park Project. DISCUSSION The 2004 Pima County Bond Implementation Ordinance allocated $1,000,000 in Pima County bond proceeds for the design and construction of the Marana Cultural and Heritage Park Project (the "Park"). The Town of Marana has begun work on the Park with the reconstruction of the Heritage Park building and grounds. Other Town- and Developer-funded improvements to the Park are currently being designed and implemented. This proposed intergovernmental agreement with Pima County facilitates Pima County's alloca- tion of $1,000,000 in Pima County bond proceeds for the Park in a fonn provided by Pima County staff and in compliance with the 2004 Pima County Bond Implementation Ordinance. This intergovernmental agreement obligates the Town to fund certain improvements to the Park, and requires the Town to operate and maintain the Park for a period of at least 25 years at an es- timated annual cost of $350,000. The Town of Marana will manage the construction of the Park and provides for reimbursement with Pima County bond proceeds in accordance with certain re- porting and payment provisions set forth in the intergovernmental agreement. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 2005-35, approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute the proposed intergovernmental agreement with Pima County for design and construc- tion of the Marana Cultural and Heritage Park. ATTACHMENT(S) Marana Cultural and Heritage Park Project intergovernmental agreement with Pima County. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to adopt Resolution No. 2005-35. {00000614.DOC /} FJC/cds 3/28/05 MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2005-35 RELATING TO PARKS AND RECREATION; APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH PIMA COUNTY FOR THE MARANA CULTURAL AND HERITAGE PARK PROJECT. WHEREAS, the 2004 Pima County Bond Ordinance (Pima County Ordinance No. 2004-18) allocated $1,000,000 in Pima County Bond proceeds for the design and construction ofthe Marana Cultural and Heritage Park Project; and WHEREAS, the total cost ofthe Marana Cultural and Heritage Park project is currently es- timated at approximately $8,915,000 with $7,915,000 coming from Town of Maran a CIP funding, Town of Marana park impact fees, and other community contributions; and WHEREAS, Pima County staff has provided a proposed form of intergovernmental agree- ment between Pima County and the Town of Maran a for the Marana Cultural and Heritage Park Pro- ject; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council ofthe Town of Marana find that it is in the best inter- ests of the public to enter into the proposed intergovernmental agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, that the intergovernmental agreement between the Town of Marana and Pima County, attached to and incorporated by this reference in this resolution as Exhibit A is hereby approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute it for and on behalf of the Town of Mar ana. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town's Manager and staff are hereby directed and authorized to undertake all other and further tasks required or beneficial to carry out the terms, obli- gations, and objectives of the aforementioned intergovernmental agreement. PASSED, ADOPTED, and APPROVED by the Mayor and Council ofthe Town of Maran a, Arizona, this 5th day of April, 2005. Mayor Bobby Sutton, Jr. ATTEST: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney {00000599.DOC I} FJC:cds 3128105 Intergovernmentali\greenaent between Pima County and the Town of Marana for the Marana Cultural and Heritage Park Project This Agreement is entered into by and between Pima County, a body politic and corporate of the State of Arizona ("County" ) and the Town of Marana ("Marana") pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (AR.S.) Section 11-952. Recitals A. County and Marana are authorized by AR.S. § 11-932 to design and build parks. B. County and Marana wish to cooperate in the design and construction of the Marana Cultural and Heritage Park (the "Proïect"). County and Marana may contract for services and enter into agreements with one another for joint or cooperative action pursuant to AR.S. § 11-952. C. A Special Bond Election was held in Pima County on May 18, 2004 in which the citizens of Pima County voted to approve the issuance of Pima County General Obligation Bonds to fund various public projects. D. Pima County Ordinance No. 2004-18 (the "Bond Ordinance") lists the Project as an approved 2004 bond-funded project (see Ordinance No. 2004- 18(VII)(D)(1)(d)(4.39), Town of Marana Parks, Cultural and Heritage Park). The Bond Ordinance allocates $1,000,000 in bond proceeds for the Project. This amount, less $10,000 which shall be retained by the County to recover a portion of the County's administrative costs associated with this project, shall be referred to herein as the "Allocated Maximum Amount." The Allocated Maximum Amount is $990,000. E. The Project is currently estimated to cost approximately $8,915,000. The Bond Ordinance states other funding in the amount of$7,915,000 will be provided by Marana, in part, from the Town of Marana CIP ($1,250,000), the Town of Marana Impact Fees ($5,000,000), and community contributions totaling $715,000. F. Projects constructed in whole or in part with bond proceeds are subject to the guidelines for bonding disclosure, accountability and implementation of County {00000595.DOC I} Page 1 of 15 bond projects in other jurisdictions contained in Pima County Code Chapter 3.06 and in the Bond Ordinance. G. Marana shall advertise, award, execute and administer the design and construction contracts for the Project and shall, after completion of the Project, operate and maintain it for the purposes described in the Bond Ordinance for at least twenty- five years. H. County will reimburse Marana in an amount not to exceed the Allocated Maximum Amount, for actual, documented Project-related expenses (other than Marana's administrative costs) not reimbursed from other funding source. I. Construction of the Project is currently scheduled to commence on or before July 1,2005, subject to acquisition of all necessary pennits, easements and environmental clearances, and is currently estimated to be completed approximately 24 months after the start of construction. Åf!reement NOW THEREFORE, County and Marana, pursuant to the above, and in consideration of the matters and things hereinafter set forth, do mutually agree as follows: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the responsibilities of the parties for the design, construction, maintenance and operation of the Project and to address legal and administrative matters among the parties. 2. Project. The Project consists ofthe design and construction of the Project as described in the Bond Ordinance: 4.39 Cultural and HeritaÇle Park Location: In the vicinity of Tangerine Road and the Santa Cruz River. Scope: The scope encompasses the planning, design, construction, and restoration of over 120 acres of open space into passive recreation and celebration of heritage. Benefits: The Town's mission with regard to its heritage and cultural resources is to preserve, celebrate and appreciate the cultures and history of the Marana area. This park will attempt to recreate some of what has been lost while at the same time creating a new civic and museum district for the residents of the area to utilize. The park is slated to include a farmers market, an amphitheater, museums, a community garden, a working farm and public buildings for civic groups. The location of the park is central to the Town of Marana but of close {00000595.DOC /} Page 2 of 15 proximity and benefit to unincorporated County residents on the east and west of the Town and for City of Tucson residents who live in the northern portions of the City. Costs: $8,915,000 with Planning/Design being $1,200,000, Construction being $7,000,000, and Other being $715,000. Bond Funding: $1,000,000 Other Funding: $7,915,000, with the Town of Marana C.I.P. providing$1,250,000, Town of Marana Impact Fees providing $5,000,000, and community contributions totaling $715,000. Project Duration: Planning/Design at 12 to 24 months and Construction at 12 to 24 months. Implementation Period:2, 3, 4 Project Management: The Town of Marana will manage the project, pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement between Pima County and Marana. The Town will also execute intergovernmental agreements with The Arizona Historical Society and Arizona State Land Office. Future Operating and Maintenance Costs: Operating and maintenance impact to the Town of Marana is $350,000 per year. 3. Design and Construction Responsibilities. Marana shall design and construct the Project in accordance with the plans and specifications cooperatively reviewed and approved by the parties, as described below. a. Standards. Marana shall design and construct the Project in compliance with all applicable building standards and codes, in compliance with Title 34 of the Arizona Revised Statutes, and in a good and workmanlike manner. b. Public Art. Marana shall manage the Pima County Public Art Program for the Project in compliance with the Pima County Board of Supervisors Policy C3.3 and Pima County Administrative Procedure 3-16. {00000595.DOC I} Page 3 of 15 c. Environmental Compliance. Marana shall prepare and incorporate into the planning, design, and construction of the Project, responses to all applicable local, state and federal environmental requirements, including but not limited to hydrologic and geotechnical investigations, compliance with the Pima County Native Plant Preservation Ordinance, protection of species identified by the Arizona Game & Fish Department and the u.s. Department ofFish and Wildlife Service as being endangered, threatened, or of concern (such as the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl), and compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (including preparation ofa Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan). d. Cultural Resources. Marana shall consider potential impacts to cultural and historical resources in the Project planning and design phases through inventory, evaluation and impact assessment, and seek to avoid impacts to these resources in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal historic preservation laws and regulations. If impacts are unavoidable, a mitigation treatment plan will be prepared in consultation with Pima County, the State Historic Preservation Office, and other agencies as appropriate, and implemented prior to construction. 4. Design. a. Consultants. If consultants are employed to design any portion of the Project, Marana shall prepare the contracts for design and choose the consultants. Marana shall have the usual rights of the owner of a public design contract, including the authority to approve changes and make payments, subject to coordination with the County, as described below. b. Design Standards and Features; Cooperation. County and Marana shall meet to coordinate design standards (meaning the applicable codes and industry standards that apply to the Project) and design features (meaning the elements to be included in the Project) prior to the preparation of final plans and specifications. The parties shall work cooperatively to agree upon the Project design. County design and field personnel shall work with their counterparts in Marana for coordination purposes. Coordination shall include meetings and information exchanges between corresponding personnel at all levels for the Project. 5. Review of Bids; Termination. Marana shall solicit bids, and award construction contracts in compliance with Title 34 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. a. County Review. Marana shall provide County the opportunity to review and comment on the solicitations for all construction contracts for the Project, including relevant scopes of work, prior to the issuance of such solicitations by Marana. {00000595.DOC /} Page 4 of 15 b. Bids in Excess of Available Funds. If the lowest responsible bid exceeds the available funds for the Project, the parties shall conduct a joint review ofthe bids immediately following opening and consult upon a course of action. The parties may terminate this agreement by mutual consent. If the parties agree to continue with the Project at the higher cost, the Bond Ordinance and this Agreement will need to be amended as provided in Section 21 below. c. Division of Costs. If, upon joint review of the bids, the parties elect to not proceed with the Project and this Agreement is terminated by mutual consent (whether pursuant to paragraph (a) above, or otherwise), the costs incurred prior to such termination shall be allocated equally to Marana and County. 6. Construction. Marana shall administer the construction contracts for the Project in accordance with the requirements of Title 34 and in accordance with the Construction Schedule (as defined below). Marana shall have the usual rights of the owner of a public construction contract. a. Construction Schedule. Marana shall be responsible for preparing a construction schedule (the "Construction Schedule") showing the anticipated timing and duration of each stage of construction. A preliminary Construction Schedule shall be provided by Marana to County within thirty days after recordation of this Agreement. A final Construction Schedule shall be established and provided to County within thirty days after award of the construction contract(s) by Marana. This Construction Schedule may be combined with the Reimbursement Schedule described later in this Agreement. b. Change Orders and Amendments. Marana shall consult with County on all requests for change orders and contract amendments with an estimated cost of more than $10,000, prior to approving or signing them. c. Contract Claims. Marana shall afford County the opportunity to review and comment on all contract claims prior to resolution thereof. d. Signage. County shall have the right to install signage at the construction site in a location of its choosing, provided that the sign does not interfere with the construction, announcing that the Project is a County bond-funded project, and listing the names of the members of the Board of Supervisors. 7. Utility Relocations. Marana shall coordinate all utility relocations for the Project. 8. Rights of Way and Construction Easements. Marana shall acquire, either by purchase or through its power of eminent domain, all rights of way and construction easements necessary for the Project. 9. Right of Entry. Execution of this Agreement by the parties grants the County the right to enter upon property owned by Marana for the purposes of inspection of the Project as set forth herein. {00000595.DOC I} Page 5 of 15 10. Project Permits. Marana shall obtain any approval, permission or permits necessary for the Project. Each party shall cooperate with the other to obtain all permits necessary for completion of the Project and shall waive all fees associated with said permits. 11. Public Participation. County and Marana shall cooperatively manage the public participation processes for the Project. The Marana shall coordinate all publicity or public participation activities with County and shall coordinate all public meetings on the Project in compliance with the Pima County Board of Supervisors Policy 3.5, Notification to Board of Supervisors of Public Meetings to be Held in their District and Pima County Administrative Procedure 3.8, Implementation of Pima County Policy 3.5, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit A. 12. County Contribution. Marana shall acknowledge the County's contribution to the Project at any public participation event in a form approved by County. Examples of acceptable forms of recognition include, but are not limited to, signs, permanent plaques, opening ceremonies and press releases. 13. Project Manager and Representatives. Marana shall furnish a Project Manager for the Project and County shall designate a representative (the "County Liaison") to be a liaison with the Project Manager during construction of the Project. 14. Disputes. In the event the Project Manager and County Liaison disagree on any aspect ofthe Project, the issue in dispute shall be submitted to the County Administrator and Marana's Mayor for resolution. 15. Financing of the Project. County shall reimburse Marana for Project expenses (which shall not include Marana's administrative costs), in the manner set forth herein, up to the Maximum Allocated Amount, and according to the expense allocation in the Bond Ordinance. No County bond funds in excess of the amount set forth herein and in the Bond Ordinance may be expended for the Project without the prior amendment of the Bond Ordinance and this Agreement by the Board of Supervisors. Marana shall pay all costs ofthe Project in excess of the Allocated Maximum Amount. 16. Reporting and Payment Responsibilities. a. Reimbursement Schedule. Marana shall, within thirty (30) days after recordation of this Agreement, submit to County a preliminary schedule (the "Reimbursement Schedule") showing the anticipated dates and amounts of requests from Marana for reimbursement of project expenses incurred and paid by Marana ("Reimbursement Requests"). A final reimbursement schedule shall be established and submitted within thirty (30) days after award of the construction contrast(s). The Reimbursement Schedule may be combined with the Construction Schedule. {00000595.DOC I} Page 6 of 15 b. Reimbursement Requests. Within 10 days of the end of each month, starting on the date indicated in the Reimbursement Schedule, Marana shall submit to County a Reimbursement Request, together with supporting documentation, in accordance with the Reimbursement Schedule, for Project expenses paid by Marana since the last Reimbursement Request. As Project Manager, Marana shall be responsible for verifying the accuracy of all invoices submitted by contractors, and shall, as part of its Reimbursement Requests, certify that said invoices have been paid by Marana (less any retention held by Marana) prior to requesting reimbursement from the County. c. Payment of Reimbursement Requests. County shall review each monthly Reimbursement Request and, if County does not approve the request, County shall notify Marana of its disapproval, and the reason for it, within seven (7) days after receipt of the Reimbursement Request. If County does not disapprove the Reimbursement Request, County shall pay the Reimbursement Request within twenty-one (21) days after receipt of the Reimbursement Request (except as set forth below with respect to the final accounting and payment). d. Monthly Progress Reports. Each month, at the same time Marana submits its Reimbursement Request, it shall also submit a progress report (the "Progress Report") in the fonnat shown on Exhibit B attached hereto. Marana shall submit a Progress Report each month of the Project even if Marana is not seeking reimbursement for the preceding month. e. Submittal of Reports. All Reimbursement Requests and Progress Reports shall be submitted to: Pima County CIP Coordinator 201 N. Stone, 6th Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701 f. Delays. Marana shall promptly notify the County at any time that Marana becomes aware of a potential Project delay that may cause a deviation from the Reimbursement Schedule and/or the Construction Schedule. In the event of any deviation from the Reimbursement Schedule, County and Marana shall establish a new Reimbursement Schedule, consistent with Federal Treasury Regulations. Upon notification by Marana that work on the Project can resume at a mutually agreed upon time and in accordance with the amended Reimbursement Schedule approved by the parties, the County will resume reimbursing Marana for Project costs. g. Final Report & Accounting. Within ninety (90) days after completion and final acceptance ofthe Project by Marana, Marana shall submit to County: (1) a final report describing the Project as constructed and summarizing its history (i.e., who designed, constructed, provided public art, funding sources, description of public participation, purpose and public benefit of the Project, etc.), along with photographs and final as built drawings; (2) a detailed final accounting {00000595.DOC /} Page 7 of 15 statement of the funds expended on the Project, along with a final Reimbursement Request if needed. County shall have fifteen (15) days after receipt of this final accounting to disapprove the Reimbursement Request. If County does not disapprove the Reimbursement Request, it shall pay the request within forty-five (45) days of receipt. 17. Regulation of the Project during Construction. Marana shall have responsibility for and control over the Project during construction. 18. Inspection. County may inspect any portion of the Project construction for substantial compliance with drawings and specifications. Marana shall allow official County representatives reasonable access to the Project site during construction. The Project Manager and County inspectors will cooperate and consult with each other during Project construction. 19. Ownership of Improvements. Ownership and title to all materials, equipment and appurtenances installed pursuant to this Agreement shall automatically vest in Marana. Marana hereby agrees not to dispose of or encumber its title or other interest in the Project improvements for a period of twenty-five (25) years following the date the Project is completed. This Section shall survive termination, cancellation, expiration or revocation, whether in whole or in part, of this Agreement. 20. Operation. For at least twenty-five years following completion of the Project, Marana shall: (1) operate and maintain the Project improvements for the purposes set forth in the description of the Project in the Bond Ordinance for the benefit of the public; (2) insure the Project improvements (through either direct or self- insurance coverage); (3) maintain, repair and if necessary replace the Project improvements; (4) make the Project improvements available to all the residents of Pima County without restriction or preference to jurisdiction of residence; and (4) not charge a fee for use of the Project improvements that is more than a fee charged by the County for a similar purpose. This Section shall survive termination, cancellation, expiration or revocation, whether in whole or in part, of this Agreement. 21. Amendment of the Bond Ordinance. Marana shall notify the County of any events that would require an amendment of the Bond Ordinance, and shall formally request the County Board of Supervisors that they hold a public hearing on the requested amendment. The parties shall follow the procedures for amendment of the Bond Ordinance set forth in Chapter 3.06 of the Pima County Code, as it may be amended or renumbered from time to time, and Section IV(B) of the Bond Ordinance. In the event the Board of Supervisors does not approve Marana's request for a Bond Ordinance amendment, Marana shall complete the Project as defined by the Bond Ordinance and this Agreement. 22. Federal Treasury Regulations. Marana acknowledges that Pima County manages the expenditures of bond proceeds in order to qualify for a spending exception to {00000595.DOC I} Page 8 of 15 the arbitrage rebate requirements of Sections 148 through 150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the related regulations found in 26 CFR Part 1, §§1.148 through 1.150 as may be modified from time to time (such statutes and regulations hereinafter referred to as the "Tax Exempt Bond Rules"). Marana acknowledges that arbitrage rebate is affected by both the use of bond proceeds and by the timing of bond related expenditures. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, County may, in County's sole discretion, either (i) reallocate Project funds to other projects funded with County bonds, or (ii) tenninate this Agreement as set forth in Paragraph 23(b )(iii) below, if, in County's sole detennination, such reallocation or tennination is necessary or advantageous to the County under the Tax Exempt Bond Rules either (a) to qualify for a spending exception to the arbitrage rebate requirements, or (b) to reduce the amount of any potential arbitrage rebate or penalty, or (c) to manage the County's bond proceeds. 23. Term and Termination. a. Term. The tenn ofthis Agreement ofthis Agreement shall begin on the date this Agreement is recorded with the Pima County Recorder, and shall end on the date that is twenty-five (25) years after completion and acceptance of the Project. The tenn of this Agreement may be extended by action of the parties. b. Termination. This Agreement may be earlier tenninated under the following circumstances: 1. For Cause. A party may tenninate this Agreement for material breach of the Agreement by the other party. Prior to any tennination under this paragraph, the party allegedly in default shall be given written notice by the other party of the nature of the alleged default. The party said to be in default shall have forty-five (45) days to cure the default. If the default is not cured within that time, the other party may tenninate this Agreement. Any such tennination shall not relieve either party from liabilities or costs already incurred under this Agreement. 11. Conflict of Interest. This Agreement can be tenninated for a conflict of interest as set forth in A.R.S. § 38-511, the relevant portions of which are hereby incorporated by reference. iii. Arbitrage Rebate Requirements. The County reserves the right to cease payments to Marana and unilaterally tenninate this Agreement if County detennines, in County's sole discretion, that any action or inaction on the part of Marana is likely to occur that would adversely affect the election made by the County under the Tax Exempt Bond Rules relating to exceptions for arbitrage rebate. c. Legal Authority. Neither party warrants to the other its legal authority to enter into this Agreement. If a court, at the request of a third person, should declare that either party lacks authority to enter into this Agreement, or any part of it, {00000595.DOC I} Page 9 of 15 then the Agreement, or parts of it affected by such order, shall be null and void, and no recovery may be had by either party against the other for lack of perfonnance or otherwise. d. Ownership of Project upon Termination. Any tennination ofthis Agreement shall not relieve any party from liabilities or costs already incurred under this Agreement, nor affect any ownership of the Project constructed pursuant to this Agreement. 24. Indemnification. To the fullest extent pennitted by law, each party to this Agreement shall indemnify, defend and hold the other party, its governing board or body, officers, departments, employees and agents, hannless from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands, liens, losses, fines or penalties, damages, liability, interest, attorney's, consultant's and accountant's fees or costs and expenses of whatsoever kind and nature, resulting from or arising out of any act or omission of the indemnifying party, its agents, employees or anyone acting under its direction or control, whether intentional, negligent, grossly negligent, or amounting to a breach of contract, in connection with or incident to the perfonnance of this Agreement. a. Preexisting conditions. To the fullest extent pennitted by law, Marana shall indemnify, defend and hold County, its boards, officers, departments, employees and agents, hannless from and against any claims and damages, as fully set out above, resulting from or arising out of the existence of any substance, material or waste, regulated pursuant to federal, state or local environmental laws, regulations or ordinances, that is present on, in or below or originated from property owned or controlled by Marana prior to the execution of this Agreement. b. Notice. Each party shall notify the other in writing within thirty (30) days of the receipt of any claim, demand, suit or judgment against the receiving party for which the receiving party intends to invoke the provisions of this Section. Each party shall keep the other party infonned on a current basis of its defense of any claims, demands, suits, or judgments under this Section. c. Negligence of indemnified party. The obligations under this Article shall not extend to the negligence of the indemnified party, its agents or employees. d. Survival of termination This Article shall survive the tennination, cancellation, expiration or revocation, whether in whole or in part, of this Agreement. 25. Insurance. When requested, a party shall provide the other party with proof of its worker's compensation, automobile, accident, property damage, and liability coverage or program of self-insurance. 26. Book and Records. Marana shall keep and maintain proper and complete books, records and accounts of the Project. For bond purposes, the Project books and records must continue to be maintained for a period of three (3) years after final {00000595.DOC I} Page 10 of 15 payment of the bonds issued for the Project. The bonds funding the Project are expected to be fully paid by June 30, 2007, but may be subject to refunding. Marana shall have the option of maintaining either, (i) the Project books and records for the requisite number of years, or (ii) conveying the Project books and records to County at any time after the Project is completed. The books, records and accounts of the Project shall be available for inspection and audit by duly authorized representatives of County at all reasonable times during the period in which said books, records and accounts are maintained by Marana. Unless Marana conveys all Project books and records to County, Marana shall indemnify and hold the County harmless from and against any amount required to be paid to the Internal Revenue Service or any governmental entity or agency arising out of the failure by Marana to maintain such records. 27. Inspection and Audit. The County may perform an inspection of the Project or an audit of Marana's books and records at any time in order to verify that monies spent on the Project were done so in accordance with this Agreement. 28. Construction of Agreement. a. Entire Agreement. This instrument constitutes the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof, and all prior or contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein. b. Amendment. This agreement shall not be modified, amended, altered or changed except by written agreement signed by the parties. c. Construction and interpretation. All provisions of this Agreement shall be construed to be consistent with the intention of the parties as expressed in the recitals hereof d. Captions and headings. The headings used in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to affect the meaning of any provision of this Agreement. e. Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof is declared invalid or void by statute or judicial decision, such action shall have no effect on other provisions and their application which can be given effect without the invalid or void provision or application, and to this extent the provisions of the Agreement are severable. In the event that any provision of this Agreement is declared invalid or void, the parties agree to meet promptly upon request of the other party in an attempt to reach an agreement on a substitute provision. 29. Legal Jurisdiction. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as either limiting or extending the legal jurisdiction of County or Marana. {00000595.DOC /} Page 11 of 15 30. No Joint Venture. It is not intended by this Agreement to, and nothing contained in this Intergovernmental Agreement shall be construed to, create any partnership, joint venture or employment relationship between the parties or create any employer-employee relationship between County and any Marana employees, or between Marana and any County employees. No party shall be liable for any debts, accounts, obligations or other liabilities whatsoever of the other, including (without limitation) the other party's obligation to withhold Social Security and income taxes for itself or any of its employees. 31. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this Agreement, or affect the legal liability of any party to this Agreement, by imposing any standard of care with respect to the maintenance of public facilities different from the standard of care imposed by law. 32. Compliance with Laws. The parties shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations, standards and executive orders, without limitation to those designated within this Agreement. a. Anti-Discrimination. The provisions of A.R.S. § 41-1463 and Executive Order 75-5, as amended by Executive Order 99-4, issued by the Governor of the State of Arizona are incorporated by this reference as a part of this Intergovernmental Agreement as if set forth in full herein. b. Americans with Disabilities Act. This Agreement is subject to all applicable provisions ofthe Americans with Disabilities Act (Public Law 101-336,42 D.S.C. 12101-12213) and all applicable federal regulations under the Act, including 28 CFR Parts 35 and 36. c. Compliance with Bond Requirements. Marana agrees to comply with all applicable provisions of Pima County Code Chapter 3.06, "Bonding Disclosure, Accountability, and Implementation" and of the Bond Ordinance, as they now exist or may hereafter be amended. Any reports to be submitted by Marana to County in compliance with Pima County Code Chapter 3.06 or the Bond Ordinance shall be provided in a fonnat and schedule detennined by County. 33. Waiver. Waiver by any party of any breach of any tenn, covenant or condition herein contained shall not be deemed a waiver of any other tenn, covenant or condition, or any subsequent breach of the same or any other tenn, covenant, or condition herein contained. 34. Force Majeure. A party shall not be in default under this Agreement if it does not fulfill any of its obligations under this Agreement because it is prevented or delayed in doing so by reason of uncontrollable forces. The tenn "uncontrollable forces" shall mean, for the purpose of this Agreement, any cause beyond the control of the party affected, including but not limited to failure of facilities, breakage or accident to machinery or transmission facilities, weather conditions, flood, earthquake, {00000595.DOC I} Page 12 of 15 lightning, fire, epidemic, war, riot, civil disturbance, sabotage, strike, lockout, labor dispute, boycott, material or energy shortage, casualty loss, acts of God, or action or non-action by governmental bodies in approving or failing to act upon applications for approvals or permits which are not due to the negligence or willful action of the parties, order of any government officer or court (excluding orders promulgated by the parties themselves), and declared local, state or national emergency, which, by exercise of due diligence and foresight, such party could not reasonably have been expected to avoid. Either party rendered unable to fulfill any obligations by reason of uncontrollable forces shall exercise due diligence to remove such inability with all reasonable dispatch. 35. Notification. All notices or demands upon any party to this agreement shall be in writing, unless other forms are designated elsewhere, and shall be delivered in person or sent by mail addressed as follows: Marana: Town Manager 11555 W. Civic Center Drive Marana, AZ 85653 (520) 682-3401 (520) 682-9026 fax County: Pima County Administrator 130 W. Congress Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 740-8751 (520) 740-8171 fax 36. Remedies. Any party may pursue any remedies provided by law for the breach of this Agreement. No right or remedy is intended to be exclusive of any other right or remedy and each shall be cumulative and in addition to any other right or remedy existing at law or in equity or by virtue of this Agreement. {00000595.DOC /} Page 13 of 15 In Witness Whereof, County has caused this Agreement to be executed by the Chair of its Board of Supervisors, upon resolution of the Board and attested to by the Clerk of the Board, and Marana has caused this Agreement to be executed by the Mayor upon resolution of the Mayor and Council and attested to by its Clerk. ATTEST: TOWN OF MARANA: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Clerk Bobby Sutton, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: PIMA COUNTY: Lori Godoshian, Clerk of the Board Sharon Bronson, Chair Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Ron Smith, Director of Marana Parks & Recreation Department Rafael Payan, Director of Pima County Natural Resources, Parks & Recreation Department Tom Burke, Pima County Director of Finance {00000595.DOC I} Page 14 of 15 Intergovernmental Agreement Determination The foregoing Intergovernmental Agreement between Pima County, and the Town of Marana has been reviewed pursuant to A.R.S. § 11-952 by the undersigned, each of whom has determined that it is in proper form and is within the powers and authority granted under the laws of the State of Arizona to the party represented by him/her. Pima County: Regina Nassen, Deputy County Attorney Date Town of Marana: Frank Cassidy, Town of Marana Attorney Date {00000595.DOC /} Page 15 of 15 EXHIBIT A '--'" ~I ·.,10." PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS POLICY Subject: Notification to Board of Supervisors of Public Meetings to be Held in Their District Policy Number Page C 3.5 1 Purpose The purpose of this Board of Supervi:lors policy. is to ensure coordination of scheduling of public meetings with the Board member within whose district the public meeting will be held. Poli cy It is the policy of the Board of Supervisors that all Pima County department administrators, directors, and managers are responsible for providing advance notification to members of the Board of Supervisors of all county-related public meetings which are scheduled .to be held within their districts. Furthermore, The Board directs the County Administrator promulgate administrative proceàures implementing this Board policy. '--" Effective Date:January 17, 1995 "--" JåN ' 7 1995 Exhibit B Pima County Intergovernmental Agreement Monthly Progress Report IGA Contract Number: IGA Title: Participant Name: Reporting Period: Reimbursement Request Attached: Reimbursement Submittals on Schedule: IGA Scope Item Progress: Overall Project Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete land Acquisition Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Planning Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete o o Yes No o o No Yes Design Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Environmental/Regulatory Compliance Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Construction Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Public Art Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Summary of Current Project Issues and Solutions: Prepared by Date TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: April 5, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. A. 2 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2005-36: Relating to Parks and Recreation; ap- proving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an intergovernmen- tal agreement with Pima County for the Tortolita Trail System. DISCUSSION This proposed intergovernmental agreement between Pima County and the Town of Marana was prepared by Pima County staff to facilitate the design and construction of the Tortolita Trail Sys- tem by providing $1,200,000 in Pima County bond proceeds as provided in the 2004 Pima County Bond Implementation Ordinance. This proposed intergovernmental agreement will obli- gate the Town to complete the construction of the Tortolita Trail System at an estimated cost to the Town of $250,000 from the Town of Marana CIP, and obligates the Town to operate and maintain the improvements at an estimated cost of $65,000 per year. The proposed intergovern- mental agreement provides for construction management by the Town, and anticipates construc- tion to occur over the next 48 to 56 months. ATTACHMENT(S) Tortolita Trail System intergovernmental agreement with Pima County. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 2005-36, approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute the Tortolita Trail System intergovernmental agreement with Pima County. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to adopt Resolution No. 2005-36. {000006/I.DOC /} FJC/cds 3/28/05 MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2005-36 RELATING TO PARKS AND RECREATION; APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH PIMA COUNTY FOR THE TORTOLITA TRAIL SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the 2004 Pima County Bond Ordinance (Pima County Ordinance No. 2004-18) provides for the design and construction of the Tortolita Trail System and allocates $1,200,000 in total Pima County bond proceeds for it; and WHEREAS, the Town of Maran a has committed $250,000 in CIP funding for the design and construction ofthe Tortolita Trail System; and WHEREAS, Pima County staff has provided a proposed fonn of intergovernmental agree- ment between Pima County and the Town of Marana for the Tortolita Trail System; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council ofthe Town of Maran a find that it is in the best interests of the public to enter into the proposed intergovernmental agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, that the intergovernmental agreement between the Town of Marana and Pima County, attached to and incorporated by this reference in this resolution as Exhibit A is hereby approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute it for and on behalf ofthe Town ofMarana. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town's Manager and staff are hereby directed and authorized to undertake all other and further tasks required or beneficial to carry out the tenns, obli- gations, and objectives of the aforementioned intergovernmental agreement. PASSED, ADOPTED, and APPROVED by the Mayor and Council ofthe Town of Maran a, Arizona, this 5th day of April, 2005. Mayor Bobby Sutton, Jf. ATTEST: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney {00000600.DOC /} FJC:cds3/28/05 IntergovernrnentalJ\greement between Pima County and the Town of Marana for the Tortolita Trail System This Agreement is entered into by and between Pima County, a body politic and corporate of the State of Arizona ("County" ) and the Town of Marana ("Marana") pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (AR.S.) Section 11-952. Recitals A County and Marana are authorized by AR.S. § 11-932 to design and build parks. B. County and Marana wish to cooperate in the design and construction of the Tortolita Trail System (the "Project"). County and Marana may contract for services and enter into agreements with one another for joint or cooperative action pursuant to AR.S. § 11-952. C. A Special Bond Election was held in Pima County on May 18, 2004 in which the citizens of Pima County voted to approve the issuance of Pima County General Obligation Bonds to fund various public projects. D. Pima County Ordinance No. 2004-18 (the "Bond Ordinance") lists the Project as an approved 2004 bond-funded project (see Ordinance No. 2004- 18(VII)(D)(1)(d)(4.40), Town of Marana Parks, Tortolita Trail System). The Bond Ordinance allocates $1,200,000 in bond proceeds for the Project. This amount, less $10,000 which shall be retained by the County to recover a portion of the County's administrative costs associated with this project, shall be referred to herein as the "Allocated Maximum Amount." E. The Project is currently estimated to cost approximately $1,450,000. The Bond Ordinance states that other funding in the arnount of $250,000 will be provided by Marana from the Town of Marana CIP. F. Projects constructed in whole or in part with bond proceeds are subject to the guidelines for bonding disclosure, accountability and implementation of County {00000596.DOC I} 1 of 15 bond projects in other jurisdictions contained in Pima County Code Chapter 3.06 and in the Bond Ordinance. G. Marana shall advertise, award, execute and administer the design and construction contracts for the Project and shall, after completion of the Project, operate and maintain it for the purposes described in the Bond Ordinance for at least twenty- five years. H. County will reimburse Marana in an amount not to exceed the Allocated Maximum Amount, for actual, documented Project-related expenses (other than Marana's administrative costs) not reimbursed from other funding sources. 1. Construction of the Project is currently scheduled to commence on or before July 1,2005, subject to acquisition of all necessary permits, easements and environmental clearances, and is currently estimated to be completed approximately 84 months after the start of construction. Af!reement NOW THEREFORE, County and Marana, pursuant to the above, and in consideration of the matters and things hereinafter set forth, do mutually agree as follows: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the responsibilities of the parties for the design, construction, maintenance and operation of the Project and to address legal and administrative matters among the parties. 2. Project. The Project consists of the design and construction ofthe Project as described in the Bond Ordinance: 4.40 Tortolita Trail System Location: Tortolita Mountains/Town of Marana's Tortolita Preserve Scope: The scope of the Tortolita Trail System development encompasses the planning, design, construction, and renovation of over 30 miles of new and existing trails associated with the Tortolita Mountain range and the Town of Marana's Tortolita Preserve. The trail system is located within the boundaries of the Town of Marana and on neighboring State and County-owned land. {00000596.DOC /} 2 of 15 Benefits: The benefits of the project include recreational opportunities for hikers, equestrians, and mountain bicyclists by providing access into the 3,245 acre Tortolita Mountain Park and 2400-acre Tortolita Preserve. Facilities include blinds for wildlife observation, scenic overlooks, interpretive signs for natural resource education, and picnic armadas. Pima County has a planned trailhead to be located at the southern end of the trail system off Tangerine Road, and Cottonwood Properties, developer of Dove Mountain is building a trailhead at the north end of their development off Dove Canyon Pass. The location of the Tortolita Trail System is of primary benefit to the residents of the Town of Marana, Oro Valley, and Pima County. Cyclists and hikers from across the state and visiting the region will be drawn to the System. Cost: $1,450,000, with Planning/Design being $145,000, Construction being $1,087,500, and Other being $217,500. Bond Funding: $1,200,000 Other Funding: $250,000 from the Town of Marana C.I.P. Project Duration: Planning/Design at 36 to 48 months and Construction at 48 to 56 months. Implementation Period: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Program Management: The Town of Marana will manage the project, pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement between Pima County, Marana, and Arizona State Land Office. Future Operating and Maintenance Costs: Operating and maintenance impact to the Town of Marana is $65,000 per year. 3. Design and Construction Responsibilities. Marana shall design and construct the Project in accordance with the plans and specifications cooperatively reviewed and approved by the parties, as described below. a. Standards. Marana shall design and construct the Project in compliance with all applicable building standards and codes, in compliance with Title 34 of the Arizona Revised Statutes, and in a good and workmanlike manner. b. Public Art. Marana shall manage the Pima County Public Art Program for the Project in compliance with the Pima County Board of Supervisors Policy C3.3 and Pima County Administrative Procedure 3-16. {00000596.DOC /} 3 of 15 c. Environmental Compliance. Marana shall prepare and incorporate into the planning, design, and construction of the Project, responses to all applicable local, state and federal environmental requirements, including but not limited to hydrologic and geotechnical investigations, compliance with the Pima County Native Plant Preservation Ordinance, protection of species identified by the Arizona Game & Fish Department and the U.S. Department ofFish and Wildlife Service as being endangered, threatened, or of concern (such as the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl), and compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (including preparation of a Stonn Water Pollution Prevention Plan). d. Cultural Resources. Marana shall consider potential impacts to cultural and historical resources in the Project planning and design phases through inventory, evaluation and impact assessment, and seek to avoid impacts to these resources in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal historic preservation laws and regulations. If impacts are unavoidable, a mitigation treatment plan will be prepared in consultation with Pima County, the State Historic Preservation Office, and other agencies as appropriate, and implemented prior to construction. 4. Design. a. Consultants. If consultants are employed to design any portion of the Project, Marana shall prepare the contracts for design and choose the consultants. Marana shall have the usual rights of the owner of a public design contract, including the authority to approve changes and make payments, subject to coordination with the County, as described below. b. Design Standards and Features; Cooperation. County and Marana shall meet to coordinate design standards (meaning the applicable codes and industry standards that apply to the Project) and design features (meaning the elements to be included in the Project) prior to the preparation of final plans and specifications. The parties shall work cooperatively to agree upon the Project design. County design and field personnel shall work with their counterparts in Marana for coordination purposes. Coordination shall include meetings and infonnation exchanges between corresponding personnel at all levels for the Project. 5. Review of Bids; Termination. Marana shall solicit bids, and award construction contracts in compliance with Title 34 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. a. County Review. Marana shall provide County the opportunity to review and comment on the solicitations for all construction contracts for the Project, including relevant scopes of work, prior to the issuance of such solicitations by Marana. {00000596.DOC I} 4 of 15 b. Bids in Excess of Available Funds. Ifthe lowest responsible bid exceeds the available funds for the Project, the parties shall conduct a joint review of the bids immediately following opening and consult upon a course of action. The parties may terminate this agreement by mutual consent. If the parties agree to continue with the Project at the higher cost, the Bond Ordinance and this Agreement will need to be amended as provided in Section 21 below. c. Division of Costs. If, upon joint review of the bids, the parties elect to not proceed with the Project and this Agreement is terminated by mutual consent (whether pursuant to paragraph (a) above, or otherwise), the costs incurred prior to such termination shall be allocated equally to Marana and County. 6. Construction. Marana shall administer the construction contracts for the Project in accordance with the requirements of Title 34 and in accordance with the Construction Schedule (as defined below). Marana shall have the usual rights of the owner of a public construction contract. a. Construction Schedule. Marana shall be responsible for preparing a construction schedule (the "Construction Schedule") showing the anticipated timing and duration of each stage of construction. A preliminary Construction Schedule shall be provided by Marana to County within thirty days after recordation of this Agreement. A final Construction Schedule shall be established and provided to County within thirty days after award of the construction contract(s) by Marana. This Construction Schedule may be combined with the Reimbursement Schedule described later in this Agreement. b. Change Orders and Amendments. Marana shall consult with County on all requests for change orders and contract amendments with an estimated cost of more than $10,000, prior to approving or signing them. c. Contract Claims. Marana shall afford County the opportunity to review and comment on all contract claims prior to resolution thereof. d. Sign age. County shall have the right to install signage at the construction site in a location of its choosing, provided that the sign does not interfere with the construction, announcing that the Project is a County bond-funded project, and listing the names of the members of the Board of Supervisors. 7. Utility Relocations. Marana shall coordinate all utility relocations for the Project. 8. Rights of Way and Construction Easements. Marana shall acquire, either by purchase or through its power of eminent domain, all rights of way and construction easements necessary for the Project. 9. Right of Entry. Execution of this Agreement by the parties grants the County the right to enter upon property owned by Marana for the purposes of inspection of the Project as set forth herein. {00000596.DOC /} 5 of 15 10. Project Permits. Marana shall obtain any approval, pennission or pennits necessary for the Project. Each party shall cooperate with the other to obtain all pennits necessary for completion of the Project and shall waive all fees associated with said pennits except sewer connection fees, the cost of which shall be split equally between Marana and the County. 11. Public Participation. County and Marana shall cooperatively manage the public participation processes for the Project. Marana shall coordinate all publicity or public participation activities with County and shall coordinate all public meetings on the Project in compliance with the Pima County Board of Supervisors Policy 3.5, Notification to Board of Supervisors of Public Meetings to be Held in their District and Pima County Administrative Procedure 3.8, Implementation of Pima County Policy 3.5, copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibit A. 12. County Contribution. Marana shall acknowledge the County's contribution to the Project at any public participation event in a fonn approved by County. Examples of acceptable fonns of recognition include, but are not limited to, signs, pennanent plaques, opening ceremonies and press releases. 13. Project Manager and Representatives. Marana shall furnish a Project Manager for the Project and County shall designate a representative (the "Countv Liaison") to be a liaison with the Project Manager during construction of the Project. 14. Disputes. In the event the Project Manager and County Liaison disagree on any aspect of the Project, the issue in dispute shall be submitted to the County Administrator and Marana's Mayor for resolution. 15. Financing of the Project. County shall reimburse Marana for Project expenses (which shall not include Marana's administrative costs), in the manner set forth herein, up to the Maximum Allocated Amount, and according to the expense allocation in the Bond Ordinance. No County bond funds in excess of the amount set forth herein and in the Bond Ordinance may be expended for the Project without the prior amendment of the Bond Ordinance and this Agreement by the Board of Supervisors. Marana shall pay all costs of the Project in excess of the Allocated Maximum Amount. 16. Reporting and Payment Responsibilities. a. Reimbursement Schedule. Marana shall, within thirty (30) days after recordation of this Agreement, submit to County a preliminary schedule (the "Reimbursement Schedule") showing the anticipated dates and amounts of requests from Marana for reimbursement of project expenses incurred and paid by Marana ("Reimbursement Requests"). A final reimbursement schedule shall be established and submitted within thirty (30) days after award of the construction contrast(s). The Reimbursement Schedule may be combined with the Construction Schedule. {00000596.DOC /} 6 of 15 b. Reimbursement Requests. Within 10 days of the end of each month, starting on the date indicated in the Reimbursement Schedule, Marana shall submit to County a Reimbursement Request, together with supporting documentation, in accordance with the Reimbursement Schedule, for Project expenses paid by Marana since the last Reimbursement Request. As Project Manager, Marana shall be responsible for verifying the accuracy of all invoices submitted by contractors, and shall, as part of its Reimbursement Requests, certify that said invoices have been paid by Marana (less any retention held by Marana) prior to requesting reimbursement from the County. c. Payment of Reimbursement Requests. County shall review each monthly Reimbursement Request and, if County does not approve the request, County shall notify Marana of its disapproval, and the reason for it, within seven (7) days after receipt of the Reimbursement Request. If County does not disapprove the Reimbursement Request, County shall pay the Reimbursement Request within twenty-one (21) days after receipt of the Reimbursement Request (except as set forth below with respect to the final accounting and payment). d. Monthly Progress Reports. Each month, at the same time Marana submits its Reimbursement Request, it shall also submit a progress report (the "Progress Report") in the format shown on Exhibit B attached hereto. Marana shall submit a Progress Report each month of the Project even if Marana is not seeking reimbursement for the preceding month. e. Submittal of Reports. All Reimbursement Requests and Progress Reports shall be submitted to: Pima County CIP Coordinator 201 N. Stone, 6th Floor Tucson, Arizona 85701 f. Delays. Marana shall promptly notify the County at any time that Marana becomes aware of a potential Project delay that may cause a deviation from the Reimbursement Schedule and/or the Construction Schedule. In the event of any deviation from the Reimbursement Schedule, County and Marana shall establish a new Reimbursement Schedule, consistent with Federal Treasury Regulations. Upon notification by Marana that work on the Project can resume at a mutually agreed upon time and in accordance with the amended Reimbursement Schedule approved by the parties, the County will resume reimbursing Marana for Project costs. g. Final Report & Accounting. Within ninety (90) days after completion and final acceptance of the Project by Marana, Marana shall submit to County: (1) a final report describing the Project as constructed and summarizing its history (i.e., who designed, constructed, provided public art, funding sources, description of public participation, purpose and public benefit of the Project, etc.), along with photographs and final as built drawings; (2) a detailed final accounting {00000596.DOC I} 7 of 15 statement of the funds expended on the Project, along with a final Reimbursement Request if needed. County shall have fifteen (15) days after receipt of this final accounting to disapprove the Reimbursement Request. If County does not disapprove the Reimbursement Request, it shall pay the request within forty-five (45) days of receipt. 17. Regulation of the Project during Construction. Marana shall have responsibility for and control over the Project during construction. 18. Inspection. County may inspect any portion of the Project construction for substantial compliance with drawings and specifications. Marana shall allow official County representatives reasonable access to the Project site during construction. The Project Manager and County inspectors will cooperate and consult with each other during Project construction. 19. Ownership of Improvements. Ownership and title to all materials, equipment and appurtenances installed pursuant to this Agreement shall automatically vest in Marana. Marana hereby agrees not to dispose of or encumber its title or other interest in the Project improvements for a period of twenty-five (25) years following the date the Project is completed. This Section shall survive termination, cancellation, expiration or revocation, whether in whole or in part, of this Agreement. 20. Operation. For at least twenty-five years following completion of the Project, Marana shall: (1) operate and maintain the Project improvements for the purposes set forth in the description of the Project in the Bond Ordinance for the benefit of the public; (2) insure the Project improvements (through either direct or self- insurance coverage); (3) maintain, repair and if necessary replace the Project improvements; (4) make the Project improvements available to all the residents of Pima County without restriction or preference to jurisdiction of residence; and (4) not charge a fee for use of the Project improvements that is more than a fee charged by the County for a similar purpose. This Section shall survive termination, cancellation, expiration or revocation, whether in whole or in part, of this Agreement. 21. Amendment of the Bond Ordinance. Marana shall notify the County of any events that would require an amendment of the Bond Ordinance, and shall formally request the County Board of Supervisors that they hold a public hearing on the requested amendment. The parties shall follow the procedures for amendment of the Bond Ordinance set forth in Chapter 3.06 of the Pima County Code, as it may be amended or renumbered from time to time, and Section IV(B) of the Bond Ordinance. In the event the Board of Supervisors does not approve Marana's request for a Bond Ordinance amendment, Marana shall complete the Project as defined by the Bond Ordinance and this Agreement. 22. Federal Treasury Regulations. Marana acknowledges that Pima County manages the expenditures of bond proceeds in order to qualify for a spending exception to {00000596.DOC I} 8 of 15 the arbitrage rebate requirements of Sections 148 through 150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the related regulations found in 26 CFR Part 1, § § 1.148 through 1.150 as may be modified from time to time (such statutes and regulations hereinafter referred to as the "Tax Exempt Bond Rules"). Marana acknowledges that arbitrage rebate is affected by both the use of bond proceeds and by the timing of bond related expenditures. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, County may, in County's sole discretion, either (i) reallocate Project funds to other projects funded with County bonds, or (ii) terminate this Agreement as set forth in Paragraph 23(b )(iii) below, if, in County's sole determination, such reallocation or termination is necessary or advantageous to the County under the Tax Exempt Bond Rules either (a) to qualify for a spending exception to the arbitrage rebate requirements, or (b) to reduce the amount of any potential arbitrage rebate or penalty, or (c) to manage the County's bond proceeds. 23. Term and Termination. a. Term. The term of this Agreement of this Agreement shall begin on the date this Agreement is recorded with the Pima County Recorder, and shall end on the date that is twenty-five (25) years after completion and acceptance of the Project. The term of this Agreement may be extended by action of the parties. b. Termination. This Agreement may be earlier terminated under the following circumstances: 1. For Cause. A party may terminate this Agreement for material breach ofthe Agreement by the other party. Prior to any termination under this paragraph, the party allegedly in default shall be given written notice by the other party of the nature of the alleged default. The party said to be in default shall have forty- five (45) days to cure the default. If the default is not cured within that time, the other party may terminate this Agreement. Any such termination shall not relieve either party from liabilities or costs already incurred under this Agreement. 11. Conflict of Interest. This Agreement can be terminated for a conflict of interest as set forth in A.R.S. § 38-511, the relevant portions of which are hereby incorporated by reference. iii. Arbitrage Rebate Requirements. The County reserves the right to cease payments to Marana and unilaterally terminate this Agreement if County determines, in County's sole discretion, that any action or inaction on the part of Marana is likely to occur that would adversely affect the election made by the County under the Tax Exempt Bond Rules relating to exceptions for arbitrage rebate. c. Legal Authority. Neither party warrants to the other its legal authority to enter into this Agreement. If a court, at the request of a third person, should declare that either party lacks authority to enter into this Agreement, or any part of it, {00000596.DOC I} 9 of 15 then the Agreement, or parts of it affected by such order, shall be null and void, and no recovery may be had by either party against the other for lack of performance or otherwise. d. Ownership of Project upon Termination. Any termination of this Agreement shall not relieve any party from liabilities or costs already incurred under this Agreement, nor affect any ownership of the Project constructed pursuant to this Agreement. 24. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, each party to this Agreement shall indemnify, defend and hold the other party, its governing board or body, officers, departments, employees and agents, harmless from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands, liens, losses, fines or penalties, damages, liability, interest, attorney's, consultant's and accountant's fees or costs and expenses of whatsoever kind and nature, resulting from or arising out of any act or omission of the indemnifying party, its agents, employees or anyone acting under its direction or control, whether intentional, negligent, grossly negligent, or amounting to a breach of contract, in connection with or incident to the performance of this Agreement. a. Preexisting conditions. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Marana shall indemnify, defend and hold County, its boards, officers, departments, employees and agents, harmless from and against any claims and damages, as fully set out above, resulting from or arising out of the existence of any substance, material or waste, regulated pursuant to federal, state or local environmental laws, regulations or ordinances, that is present on, in or below or originated from property owned or controlled by Marana prior to the execution of this Agreement. b. Notice. Each party shall notify the other in writing within thirty (30) days of the receipt of any claim, demand, suit or judgment against the receiving party for which the receiving party intends to invoke the provisions of this Section. Each party shall keep the other party informed on a current basis of its defense of any claims, demands, suits, or judgments under this Section. c. Negligence of indemnified party. The obligations under this Article shall not extend to the negligence of the indemnified party, its agents or employees. d. Survival of termination This Article shall survive the termination, cancellation, expiration or revocation, whether in whole or in part, of this Agreement. 25. Insurance. When requested, a party shall provide the other party with proof of its worker's compensation, automobile, accident, property damage, and liability coverage or program of self-insurance. 26. Book and Records. Marana shall keep and maintain proper and complete books, records and accounts of the Project. For bond purposes, the Project books and records must continue to be maintained for a period of three (3) years after final {00000596.DOC I} 10 of 15 payment of the bonds issued for the Project. The bonds funding the Project are expected to be fully paid by June 30, 2012, but may be subject to refunding. Marana shall have the option of maintaining either, (i) the Project books and records for the requisite number of years, or (ii) conveying the Project books and records to County at any time after the Project is completed. The books, records and accounts of the Project shall be available for inspection and audit by duly authorized representatives of County at all reasonable times during the period in which said books, records and accounts are maintained by Marana. Unless Marana conveys all Project books and records to County, Marana shall indemnify and hold the County harmless from and against any amount required to be paid to the Internal Revenue Service or any governmental entity or agency arising out of the failure by Marana to maintain such records. 27. Inspection and Audit. The County may perform an inspection of the Project or an audit of Marana's books and records at any time in order to verify that monies spent on the Project were done so in accordance with this Agreement. 28. Construction of Agreement. a. Entire Agreement. This instrument constitutes the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof, and all prior or contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein. b. Amendment. This agreement shall not be modified, amended, altered or changed except by written agreement signed by the parties. c. Construction and interpretation. All provisions ofthis Agreement shall be construed to be consistent with the intention of the parties as expressed in the recitals hereof d. Captions and headings. The headings used in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to affect the meaning of any provision of this Agreement. e. Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof is declared invalid or void by statute or judicial decision, such action shall have no effect on other provisions and their application which can be given effect without the invalid or void provision or application, and to this extent the provisions of the Agreement are severable. In the event that any provision of this Agreement is declared invalid or void, the parties agree to meet promptly upon request of the other party in an attempt to reach an agreement on a substitute provision. 29. Legal Jurisdiction. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as either limiting or extending the legal jurisdiction of County or Marana. {00000596.DOC I} 11 of 15 30. No Joint Venture. It is not intended by this Agreement to, and nothing contained in this Intergovernmental Agreement shall be construed to, create any partnership, joint venture or employment relationship between the parties or create any employer-employee relationship between County and any Marana employees, or between Marana and any County employees. No party shall be liable for any debts, accounts, obligations or other liabilities whatsoever of the other, including (without limitation) the other party's obligation to withhold Social Security and income taxes for itself or any of its employees. 31. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this Agreement, or affect the legal liability of any party to this Agreement, by imposing any standard of care with respect to the maintenance of public facilities different from the standard of care imposed by law. 32. Compliance with Laws. The parties shall comply with all applicable federal, state and 10ca11aws, rules, regulations, standards and executive orders, without limitation to those designated within this Agreement. a. Anti-Discrimination. The provisions of A.R.S. § 41-1463 and Executive Order 75-5, as amended by Executive Order 99-4, issued by the Governor of the State of Arizona are incorporated by this reference as a part of this Intergovernmental Agreement as if set forth in full herein. b. Americans with Disabilities Act. This Agreement is subject to all applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Public Law 101-336,42 U.S.c. 12101-12213) and all applicable federal regulations under the Act, including 28 CFR Parts 35 and 36. c. Compliance with Bond Requirements. Marana agrees to comply with all applicable provisions of Pima County Code Chapter 3.06, "Bonding Disclosure, Accountability, and Implementation" and of the Bond Ordinance, as they now exist or may hereafter be amended. Any reports to be submitted by Marana to County in compliance with Pima County Code Chapter 3.06 or the Bond Ordinance shall be provided in a format and schedule determined by County. 33. Waiver. Waiver by any party of any breach of any term, covenant or condition herein contained shall not be deemed a waiver of any other term, covenant or condition, or any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition herein contained. 34. Force Majeure. A party shall not be in default under this Agreement if it does not fulfill any of its obligations under this Agreement because it is prevented or delayed in doing so by reason of uncontrollable forces. The term "uncontrollable forces" shall mean, for the purpose of this Agreement, any cause beyond the control of the party affected, including but not limited to failure of facilities, breakage or accident to machinery or transmission facilities, weather conditions, flood, earthquake, {00000596.DOC I} 12 of 15 lightning, fire, epidemic, war, riot, civil disturbance, sabotage, strike, lockout, labor dispute, boycott, material or energy shortage, casualty loss, acts of God, or action or non-action by governmental bodies in approving or failing to act upon applications for approvals or permits which are not due to the negligence or willful action of the parties, order of any government officer or court (excluding orders promulgated by the parties themselves), and declared local, state or national emergency, which, by exercise of due diligence and foresight, such party could not reasonably have been expected to avoid. Either party rendered unable to fulfill any obligations by reason of uncontrollable forces shall exercise due diligence to remove such inability with all reasonable dispatch. 35. Notification. All notices or demands upon any party to this agreement shall be in writing, unless other forms are designated elsewhere, and shall be delivered in person or sent by mail addressed as follows: Marana: Town Manager 11555 W. Civic Center Dr. Marana, AZ 85653 (520) 682-3401 (520) 682-9026 fax County: Pima County Administrator 130 W. Congress Tucson, AZ 85701 (520) 740-8751 (520) 740-8171 fax 36. Remedies. Any party may pursue any remedies provided by law for the breach of this Agreement. No right or remedy is intended to be exclusive of any other right or remedy and each shall be cumulative and in addition to any other right or remedy existing at law or in equity or by virtue of this Agreement. {00000596.DOC I} 13 of 15 In Witness Whereof, County has caused this Agreement to be executed by the Chair of its Board of Supervisors, upon resolution of the Board and attested to by the Clerk of the Board, and Marana has caused this Agreement to be executed by the Mayor upon resolution of the Mayor and Council and attested to by its Clerk. ATTEST: TOWN OF MARANA: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Clerk Bobby Sutton, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: PIMA COUNTY: Lori Godoshian, Clerk of the Board Sharon Bronson, Chair Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Ron Smith, Director of Marana Parks & Recreation Department Rafael Payan, Director of Pima County Natural Resources, Parks & Recreation Department Tom Burke, Pima County Director of Finance {00000596.DOC I} 14 of 15 Intergovernmental Agreement Determination The foregoing Intergovernmental Agreement between Pima County and the Town of Marana has been reviewed pursuant to A.R.S. § 11-952 by the undersigned, each of whom has determined that it is in proper form and is within the powers and authority granted under the laws of the State of Arizona to the party represented by him/her. Pima County: Regina Nassen, Deputy County Attorney Date Town of Marana: Frank Cassidy, Town of Marana Attorney Date {00000596.DOC I} 15 of 15 EXHIBIT A '-'" ~I ....'.0.,. PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS POLICY Subject Notification to Board of supervisors of Public Meetings to be Held in Their District Policy Number Page C 3.5 1 Purpose 7he purpose of this Board of Supervisors policy. is to ensure coordination of scheduling of public meetings with the Board member within whose district the public meeting will be held. Policy It is the policy of the Board of Supervisors that all Pima County department administrators, directors, and managers are responsible for providing advance notification to members of the Board of Supervisors of all County-related public meetings which are scheduled .to be held within their districts. Furthermore, The Board directs the County Administrator promulgate administrative procedures implementing this Board policy. '-'" Effective Date:January 17, 1995 ,---,. JåN 1 7 1995 Exhibit B Pima County Intergovernmental Agreement Monthly Progress Report IGA Contract Number: IGA Title: Participant Name: Reporting Period: Reimbursement Request Attached: o Yes o No Reimbursement Submittals on Schedule: o Yes o No IGA Scope Item Progress: Overall Project Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete land Acquisition Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Planning Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Design Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Environmental/Regulatory Compliance Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Construction Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Public Art Start Date Finish Date Percent Complete Summary of Current Project Issues and Solutions: Prepared by Date TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION MEETING DATE: AprilS, 2005 TOWN OF MARANA AGENDA ITEM: IX. A. 3 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: C. Brad DeSpain, Utilities Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2005-37: Relating to Water; consenting to the annexation of property owned by Cortessa, L.L.C. into the Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District. DISCUSSION Metro Water District's Board of Directors unanimously approved the annexation of property owned by Cortessa, L.L.c. into the Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District. Per A.R.S. § 48-902(G), Metro Water District's Board is seeking the consent of the governing body that is within six miles of the noncontiguous area that is to be annexed. Since the property that has been annexed within six miles of the Town, Metro Water District's Board is requesting the Town of Marana consent to this annexation. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council adopt Resolution No. 2005-37, consenting to the annexation of property owned by Cortessa, L.L.C into the Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to adopt Resolution No. 2005-37. BLU Metro Consent 03/31/20059:35 AM APM MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2005-37 RELATING TO WATER; CONSENTING TO THE ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY CORTES SA, L.L.C. INTO THE METROPOLITAN DOMESTIC WATER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. WHEREAS, Metro Water District's Board of Directors unanimously approved the annexation of property owned by Cortessa, L.L.C. into the Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District; and WHEREAS, per A.R.S. § 48-902(G), Metro Water District's Board is seeking the consent of the governing body that is within six miles of the noncontiguous area that is to be annexed; and WHEREAS, the property that has been annexed is within six miles of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town of Marana has no objection to the annexation of the property; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, that the Town of Marana consents to the Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District for the annexation of the property owned by Cortessa, L.L.C. into the Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council ofthe Town of Maran a, Arizona, this 5th day of April, 2005. Mayor Bobby Sutton, Jr. ATTEST: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney RSO 040405 Metro Consent 2005-37 APM 3/31/2005 TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: April 5, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. A. 4 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Roy Cuaron, Finance Director SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2005-38: Relating to Standing Boards, Committees and Commissions; approving reappointments to the Town of Marana Business Advisory Committee DISCUSSION The terms of Business Advisory Committee (BAC) members Dana Villarreal, Michelle Martin, Kelle Maslyn and Michael Osborne expired in March 2005. All have agreed to continue to serve on the committee and the BAC respectfully requests that Members Villarreal, Martin, Maslyn and Osborne be reappointed for another term. Ms. Villarreal is the manager of the Alphagraphics store located on Ina Road, while Ms. Martin is the owner of Marana Insurance Agency. Ms. Maslyn is the government liaison with Comcast Cable, and Mr. Osborne is the district operations manager for McDonald's restaurants. All individuals are either employed by, or own businesses within the corporate town boundaries. If reappointed, these BAC members will serve until March 2008. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the reappointment of Dana Villarreal, Michelle Martin, Kelle Maslyn and Michael Osborne to the Town of Marana Business Advisory Committee for terms expiring in March 2008. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to approve Resolution No. 2005-38. BAC Reappointments 03/30/2005; 2:41 PM; RC MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2005-38 RELATING TO STANDING BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS; APPROVING REAPPOINTMENTS TO THE TOWN OF MARANA BUSINESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, the Business Advisory Committee has been created by the Town Council to meet and advise the Town Council on business concerns within the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to fill four (4) seats and reappoint Dana Villarreal, Michelle Martin, Kelle Maslyn and Michael Osborne to the committee; and WHEREAS, Dana Villarreal, Michelle Martin, Kelle Maslyn and Michael Osborne shall be reappointed to serve three-year terms, said terms expiring in March 2008. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Marana, Arizona, that Dana Villarreal, Michelle Martin, Kelle Maslyn and Michael Osborne shall be reappointed to the Business Advisory Committee with a term of office to expire in March of 2008. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Marana, Arizona, this 5th day of April 2005. Mayor Bobby Sutton, Jf. ATTEST: Jocelyn C. Bronson Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney As Town Attorney TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: April 5, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. A. 5 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2005-39: Relating to Development; approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute an Amendment to Development Agreements relating to the definition of "Resort Hotel" under the Dove Mountain Resort Agreement recorded at Docket 11594, Page 3855; and declaring an emergency. DISCUSSION The Town and Cottonwood Properties entered into an agreement dated June 19, 2001 (the "Re- sort Agreement") establishing certain terms and provisions for the construction of a future resort hotel at Dove Mountain and providing financial incentives to the resort hotel. The Resort Agree- ment defined "Resort Hotel" to include over 400 rooms. Cottonwood now requests that the Re- sort Hotel definition be modified to include a resort hotel containing at least 200 rooms, to pro- vide additional flexibility and increase the Developer's ability to attract a first class hotel to lo- cate within the Town of Marana. The proposed Amendment to Development Agreements has been prepared to revise the definition accordingly. Town staff anticipates that the Town's net recurring revenues (taking into account the developer rebate from recurring resort sales tax and the costs relating to the preserve and the convention bureau) will be approximately $9.4 million over a ten-year period, which is a reduction of only about 25% from the originally anticipated net recurring revenues of approximately $12.8 million. The higher anticipated revenues per room are the result of the higher quality of hotel operator available to operate a 200 room hotel. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 2005-39, approving and authorizing the execution of the Amendment to Development Agreements. ATTACHMENT(S) Arnendrnent to Development Agreements SUGGESTED MOTION I move to adopt Resolution No. 2005-39. {000006 J 8.DOC /} FJC/cds 3/29/05 MARANA RESOLUTION NO. 2005-39 RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT; APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "RESORT HOTEL" UNDER THE DOVE MOUNTAIN RESORT AGREEMENT RECORDED AT DOCKET 11594, PAGE 3855; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the Town of Marana entered into an agreement dated June 19, 2001, recorded at Docket 11594, Page 3855, Pima County Recorder's Office (the "Resort Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the Resort Agreement offered certain financial incentives for the future development of a resort hotel, which was defined as having at least 400 rooms; and WHEREAS, the Town and the affected property owner now desire to reduce the number of hotel rooms in the resort hotel definition to 200 to allow additional flexibility in attracting a first class resort hotel to the Town of Marana; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council find that approval of the Amendment to Development Agreements is in the best interest of the Town and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, that the Amendment to Development Agreements attached to and incorporated by this reference in this resolution as Exhibit A is hereby approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute it for and on behalf of the Town of Marana. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town's Manager and staff are hereby directed and authorized to undertake all other and further tasks required or beneficial to carry out the terms, obligations, and objectives of the aforementioned amendment. {00000617.DOC /} FJC/cds 3/29/05 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT since it is necessary for the preservation of the peace, health and safety of the Town of Marana that this resolution become immediately effective, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, and this resolution shall be effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, this 5th day of April, 2005. Mayor Bobby Sutton, Jr. ATTEST: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney {00000617.DOC I} FJC/cds 3129105 2 AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS (Amends Document Recorded in Docket 11594 at Page 3855) This Amendment (the "Amendment") is made as of , 2005 by and among the Town of Marana, an Arizona municipal corporation (the "Town"), Cottonwood Properties, Inc., an Arizona corporation ("Cottonwood"), Lawyers Title of Arizona, Inc., an Arizona corporation, as Trustee under Trust No. 7804- T ("Trust 7804") and as Trustee under Trust No. 7805- T ("Trust 7805"). RECITALS: A. The parties hereto (or their predecessors in interest) are parties to that certain Amendment to Development Agreements made as of June 19, 2001, and recorded in Docket 11594 at Page 3855 in the Office of the Pima County Recorder ("Resort Agreement") and to the Development Agreements defined in the Resort Agreement, and certain amendments to such Development Agreements. The Resort Agreement and the Development Agreements (as mostly recently amended) shall be collectively referred to herein as the "Current Development Agreements". B. Trust 7804 and Trust 7805 are the current owners ofa majority ofthe property described and depicted in the Current Development Agreements (exclusive of the District 1 Property described in the Phase 1 Agreement) and are the assignees of the Developer's rights and obligations under the Current Development Agreements. C. The parties hereto desire to amend the definition of "Resort Hotel" set forth in the Resort Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto state, confinn and agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Resort Hotel. The definition of "Resort Hotel" within the Resort Agreement is amended to reduce the minimum number of hotel rooms from 400 to 200. Except for the foregoing amendment, the Current Development Agreements shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. 2. Miscellaneous. Time is hereby made ofthe essence of this Agreement. {00000620.DOC I} The wording of this Agreement has been arrived at by negotiation between the parties, and, in the event of any ambiguity, this Agreement shall not be construed in favor of or against any party hereto on account of such party having prepared any draft or final version hereof. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their successors and assigns. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and the parties expressly acknowledge that there are no other agreements or understandings in regard to this transaction other than as set forth herein or contained within other written agreements referred to herein. The recitals set forth herein are true and correct in all material respects and are incorporated herein by reference. If any party is required pursuant to this Agreement to give its prior written approval, consent or permission, such approval, consent or permission shall not be unreasonably delayed or withheld. Each party hereto shall from time to time execute and deliver such further instruments as the other party or its counsel may reasonably request to effectuate the intent ofthis Agreement, including, but not limited to, documents necessary for compliance with the laws, ordinances, rules or regulations of any applicable governmental authorities. In the event oflitigation to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. The waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, condition or covenant contained herein. If any provision or any portion of any provision of this Agreement or the application of any such provision or any portion thereof shall be held invalid or unenforceable, the remaining portion of such provision and the remaining provisions of this Agreement, or the application of such provision or portion of such provision, shall not be affected thereby. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Arizona. In the event of any dispute hereunder, exclusive jurisdiction and venue shall exist only in Pima County, Arizona. In particular this Agreement is subject to the provisions of A.R.S. § 38-511. {00000620.DOC /} 2 Captions and headings as set forth herein are for reference purposes only and shall not be used in construing this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties executed this Agreement the day and year written above. TOWN OF MARANA, an Arizona municipal corporation COTTONWOOD PROPERTIES, INC., an Arizona corporation Bobby Sutton, Jr., Mayor By: [Print Name] ATTEST: Its: Jocelyn Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: LAWYERS TITLE OF ARIZONA, INC., an Arizona corporation, as Trustee under Trust Nos. 7804- T and 7805- T only, and not in its corporate capacity Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney By: [Print Name] Its: STATE OF ARIZONA) COUNTY OF PIMA ) ss.: ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 2005, by of Cottonwood Properties, Inc., an Arizona corporation, on behalf of the corporation. [Seal] Notary Public STATE OF ARIZONA ) ) ss.: COUNTY OF PIMA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 2005, by of Lawyers Title of Arizona, Inc., an Arizona corporation, on behalf of the corporation, as Trustee under Trust Nos. 7804- T and 7805- T only, and not in its corporate capacity. [Seal] Notary Public {00000620.DOC I} 3 TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMA TION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: April 5, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. A. 6 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Jane Howell, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Relatinf! to Personnel: approving and authorizing the reclassification of a Planner II position to Landscape Architect and hiring a Landscape Architect and a Court Security Officer with appropriate salary levels DISCUSSION A Planner II vacancy was created with the resignation of Kathy Morris. Planning Director Barbara Berlin has evaluated the department and has ascertained that a landscape architect is needed to address many of the directly related general plan issues, both short-term and long- term. This person would assume a senior level role in reviewing specific plans and other rezonings and would playa key role in: · reviewing new submittals for compliance with the intent of the new residential design standards; · developing and implementing new commercial design standards for areas outside the Town Core; · reviewing landscape plans for compliance with technical and native plant requirements. A second AzPOST -certified Court Security Officer would provide continuous security of the Court. The armed officer would operate the magnetometer when court is in session and the other officer is in the courtroom. The officer will also allow appropriate coverage for lunch times and absences due to illness, vacation and mandated training and assist serving various court orders, which would alleviate demands on police officers to serve the orders. In addition, one of the officers will coordinate with all money collecting departments to make the daily deposits and provide supplemental security to Bldg A when court is not in session. Annual fiscal impact would be: Landscape Architect $60,000 salary + $18,000 benefits= $78,000 Current position: Planner II $44,433 salary + $13,327 benefits= $57.749 Fiscal impact to upgrade position frorn Planner II to Landscape Architect: $20,251 There are no costs for furniture, fixtures or equipment. There may be software costs and other incidental expenses. Additional StafJ-Landscape Architect 3/30/20059:09 AM/NJH Court Security Officer $30,000 salary+$9,000 benefits= Additional expenses (uniforms, weapon, and misc.) Fiscal impact $39,000 2,000 $41,000 Total Fiscal Impact $61,251 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends authorization to reclassify a Planner II position to a Landscape Architect position and hire an additional Court Security Officer, with an approximate fiscal impact of $61,251. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to approve and authorize the reclassification of a Planner II position to Landscape Architect and hiring a Landscape Architect and a Court Security Officer. -2- TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: April 5, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. A. 7 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Mike Reuwsaat, Town Manager AGENDA TITLE: Relatinf! to Administration; adopting the Town of Marana Policy for Office Assignments for Council Members DISCUSSION With the opening of the new Municipal Complex, there will be office space available for Mayor and Council members. Since these positions change over time, the Town must establish a policy to detennine the distribution of these offices, now and in the future. The Mayor will have a designated office and the draft policy attached delineates a process by which the remaining six offices will be assigned. It provides for the distribution of these offices based upon seniority, but with preference given to the Vice Mayor position. ATTACHMENTS I) Draft Office Assignment Policy 2) Report on Council Seniority 3) Municipal Complex Floor Plan RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the draft policy attached. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to adopt the Town of Marana Policy for Office Assignments for Council Members. Town of Marana Policy Office Assignments for Council Members The Municipal Complex is equipped with a designated office for the Mayor and six offices for the remaining Council Members. When determining the office placement for the rest of the Council, the Vice Mayor will have the first choice and the remaining Council members will be offered their choice of office on the basis of seniority, as defined by uninterrupted time served on the consecutive Town Councils. In the event that any Council Member expresses indifference (in writing to the Town Manager) as to the office they are assigned, the Council Members below them in terms of seniority will be given the opportunity to select from the remaining offices. If, at the end, there are unassigned offices, those Council Members who didn't have a preference will be assigned one by lottery. In the case that Council Members of equal seniority (having served on the Town Council for the same length of time) express a preference for offices, the order oftheir choices will also be decided by lottery. If offices become available through resignations or elections and Council Members wish to move into these open offices, they can be reassigned based on seniority. The new member(s) of the Council will receive the remaining office(s) once those Members with more seniority choose to move or remain in their current office. Apart from this circumstance, there will be no trading or reassignments. Information regarding the seniority of the current council, based on data provided by the Clerk's Office, is attached. Council Seniority Years Served on Council (Consecutive to current Council) Council Member: Time on Council: Term Expires: Ed Honea 13 yrs, 3 mos 2007 Herb Kai 11 yrs, 3 mos 2009 Bobby Sutton 9 yrs, 3 mos 2007 Jim Blake 5 yrs, 3 mos 2007 Carol McGorray 3 yrs, 11 mos 2009 Patti Comerford 3 yrs, 8 mos 2009 Tim Escobedo 3 yrs, 8 mos 2009 l~~' Nyl I},' II'. / _{i .I ..~/. ~// ¡' t. :,~ } .í , , ~ J , " \\ ../'" \/.. ;! -., \ ,. \ \ \. \. , l ¡ " .-/ ì -1 r o ~ ~ --- -- --- -- ---" -- -- -- --- --- -- .- z _..-- í l , H-::-!ij \ f,~r--f l '\ ! ¡¡I I"~ 1/ f! /·Nj \ /11; I ,¡' I, 1 / 1 L-J ¡ i \ ¡ r---J i I I¡ff','! ! J , {¡ .! ¡-¡ ¡ 1 . I ¡ Î I ~r I ~ PROCLAMATION ARIZONA WORK ZONE SAFETY AWARENESS WEEK WHEREAS, the recognition of Arizona Work Zone Safety Awareness Week is an opportunity for state and local agencies to promote motorist awareness of the special driving circumstances that road and work zone construction areas present; and WHEREAS, the theme of this year's activities is: "Enhancing Safety and Mobility in Highway Work Zones;" and WHEREAS, in 2003 there were 36 fatalities in Arizona documented as a result of work zone incidents; and WHEREAS, the primary goal of Arizona Work Zone Safety Awareness Week is to urge both motorists and workers to take basic steps to help save lives and prevent injuries in work zones by giving their full attention to the roadway and recognizing the orange and/or green signs along roadways that indicate work zones; and WHEREAS, the Town of Marana is joining a coalition of other state and local organizations and municipalities in undertaking the campaign by issuing a call to action to all drivers with the express goal of saving lives to help Arizonans during another season of road construction in the Copper State. NOW, THEREFORE, the Mayor and Council of the Town of Marana, publicly endorse Arizona Work Zone Safety Awareness Week from April 3-9, 2005 and request that the Town of Marana be added to the list of organizations and municipalities supporting this important project. Dated this 15th day of March, 2005. ~ ATTEST: 9~'~ MAYOR Bobby Sutton, Jr. /" ,"\ /\ / Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk .~ TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMA TION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: April 5, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. B. 1 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Barbara C. Berlin, Planning Director SUBJECT: Casa Seville Specific Plan Presentation only. BLUE SHEET TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATIONCasa Seville.doc TOWN COUNCIL MEETING TOWN OF MARANA INFORMATION MEETING DATE: AprilS, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. B. 2 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Barbara C. Berlin AICP, Planning Director SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING. Ordinance No. 2005.10: Relating to Development; approving a rezoning of 20 acres of land from Zone "C" to Zone "HI" south of Tangerine Road and east of Breakers Road. DISCUSSION Cutler Investments LLS and Contractors Yards LLC, represented by The Planning Center, are seeking the approval of a rezoning for a 20-acre site from "C" (Large Lot Zone) to "HI" (Heavy Industrial) for the purpose of developing landscaping and contractors yards. The subject site is generally located 1300 feet south of Tangerine Road and 660 feet east of the Breakers Road easement. The Marana Planning Commission held a public hearing on this application at their regular meeting of January 26,2005, and voted 6-0 recommending approval to the Mayor and Council. The Town of Marana General Plan Update, ratified March 11, 2003 designates the subject area as Industrial General (IG). The purpose and intent of the General Plan's "IG" category is to allow uses that include storage, processing, fabrications and distribution. The proposed "HI" zoning district and the proposed use (contractor and landscaping yards) meet the purpose and intent of the "IG" category. The Landscaping and Contractor Yards Rezoning proposes a single access point provided by an existing ingress/egress easement extending eastward off of the Breakers Road Easement 660 feet to the northwest portion of the property. The site analysis and Planning Commission report do not propose improvements to the existing Breakers Road easement. However, to ensure the access road is improved to accommodate the increased traffic volumes staff recommends that the applicant make road improvements as follows: · The property owner shall improve Breakers Road easement by constructing 24 feet of new road between Tangerine Road and the east west lateral access point. These improvements shall be made in a manner acceptable to the Development Services Administrator. · The property owner shall construct the east/west lateral access off the Breakers Road easement. These improvements shall be made in a manner acceptable to the Development Services Administrator. 040505 PCZ-031 07 Landscaping and Contractor Yards Rezoning.doc Page 1 of3 RECOMMENDA TION: Staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 2005.10 the Landscaping and Contractor Yards Rezoning with the following conditions. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Compliance with all provisions of the Town's codes, ordinances as current at the time of any subsequent development, including, but not limited to, requirements for public improvements. 2. The property owner shall improve Breakers Road easement by constructing 24 linear feet of new road between Tangerine Road and the east west lateral access point. These improvements shall be made in a manner acceptable to the Development Services Administrator. 3. The property owner shall construct the east/west lateral access off the Breakers Road easement. These improvements shall be made in a manner acceptable to the Development Services Administrator. 4. This rezoning is valid for three years from the date of Town Council approval; if the developer fails to have a development plan or plat recorded prior to the three years the Town may initiate the necessary action to revert the property to the original zoning, upon action by the Town Council. 5. The property owner shall not cause any lot split of any kind without the written consent of the Town of Marana. 6. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any use on the property, the Developer, the Developer shall have completed or shall provide evidence to the Town's satisfaction that the Developer has made a diligent effort to complete the process of having the Property annexed into a fire district or otherwise provide for fire protection service as accepted by the Town. 7. Development of this project shall comply with the conditions set forth in the Native Plant Pennit approval letter dated December 21, 2001. 8. No approval, pennit or authorization by the Town of Marana authorizing the applicant and/or the land owner to violate any federal or state laws or regulations, or relieves the applicant and/or the land owner from responsibility to ensure compliance with all applicable federal and state laws and regulations, including the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act. The applicant is advised to retain appropriate expert and/or consult with the appropriate federal and state agencies to detennine any action necessary to assure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. 9. The development plan shall be in general confonnance with the tentative development plan as adopted by Mayor and Council. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2005.10 with the recommended conditions. 040505 PCl-03l 07 Landscaping and Contractor Yards Rezoning.doc Page 2 of2 MARANA ORDINANCE NO. 2005.10 RELA TING TO DEVELOPMENT; APPROVING A REZONING OF 20 ACRES OF LAND FROM ZONE "C" TO ZONE "HI" SOUTH OF TANGERINE ROAD AND EAST OF BREAKERS ROAD. WHEREAS, The Planning Center represents the property owners of approximately 20-acres of land located within a portion of Section 5, Township 12 South, Range 12 East; and, WHEREAS, the Marana Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 26, 2005, and at said meeting voted 6-0 to recommend that the Town Council approve said rezoning, adopting the recommended conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Marana Town Council heard from representatives of the owner, staff and members ofthe public at the regular Town Council meeting held AprilS, 2005 and has determined that the rezoning should be approved; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Marana, Arizona, as follows: Section 1. The zoning of approximately 20-acres of land generally located 1300 feet south of Tangerine Road and 660 feet east of Breakers Road easement (rezoning area), within a portion of Section 5, Township 12 South, Range 12 East is hereby changed from "C" (Large Lot Zone) to "HI" (Heavy Industrial). Section 2. The purpose ofthis rezoning is to allow the use ofthe rezoning area for landscaping and contractor yards, subject to the following conditions, the violation of which shall be treated in the same manner as a violation of the Town of Marana Land Development Code (but which shall not cause a reversion of this rezoning ordinance): 1. The property owner shall comply with all provisions of the Town's codes and ordinances current at the time of any subsequent development, including, but not limited to, requirements for public improvements. 2. The property owner shall improve Breakers Road easement by constructing 24 linear feet of new road between Tangerine Road and the east/west lateral access point. These improvements shall be made in a manner acceptable to the Development Services Administrator. 3. The property owner shall construct the east/west lateral access off the Breakers Road easement. These improvements shall be made in a manner acceptable to the Development Services Administrator. Marana Ordinance No. 2005.10 Page 1 of 2 4. This rezoning is valid for three years from the date of Town Council approval; if the developer fails to have a development plan or plat recorded prior to the three years the Town may initiate the necessary action to revert the property to the original zoning, upon action by the Town Council. 5. The property owner shall not cause any lot split of any kind without the written consent of the Town of Marana. 6. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any use on the property, the Developer shall have completed or shall provide evidence to the Town's satisfaction that the Developer has made a diligent effort to complete the process of having the Property annexed into a fire district or otherwise provide for fire protection service as accepted by the Town. 7. Development of this project shall comply with the conditions set forth in the Native Plant Permit approval letter dated December 21,2001. 8. No approval, permit or authorization by the Town of Maran a authorizes the applicant and/or the land owner to violate any federal or state laws or regulations, or relieves the applicant and/or the land owner from responsibility to ensure compliance with all applicable federal and state laws and regulations, including the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act. The applicant is advised to retain appropriate expert and/or consult with the appropriate federal and state agencies to determine any action necessary to assure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. 9. The development plan shall be in general conformance with the tentative development plan as adopted by Mayor and Council. Section 3. All Ordinances, Resolutions and Motions and parts of Ordinances, Resolutions, and Motions of the Marana Town Council in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed, effective as of the effective date of Ordinance No. 2005.10. Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council ofthe Town of Maran a, Arizona, this 5th day of April, 2005. ATTEST: MAYOR Bobby Sutton, Jr. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Marana Ordinance No. 2005.10 Page 2 of 2 ~.... ..~ .. I.. I <.j MARANA , ~/j~ TOWN OF MARANA Tangerine Rezoning CASE NO. PCZ-03107 .. 700 0 I 700 14~0 Feet~ Tht Town of Marane provKlIt.thi.m~ Inf9mNl:1ion "A. I." .. tilt" reQ\H'fl of 'the user with the under""'ding tnllt it is not gueJ....cf to- be .ccurett. correct or e.omþlete and concfU&lon$ drðWn from ~h Infomatlon are the recf:>onelblllty oft"" u~r 11'1 no event.hall "fh4. Town of"'.",. beC"09me lIaÞlt to' UUffi of the"... d..c:a, ::::q~~~·Z~~:.::r~::::Od~~~~I::~ ~f~~: ~~;~~I QI good·...I.. .rloln( ftom tho u...... modltk:~o" of tho dat.. REQUEST Request for approval to rezone approximatley 20 acres of land currently zoned "C" (Large Lot Zone) to "HI" (heavy Industrial) Rezoning: South of Tangerine East of Breakers Road Development Capability Report Town of Marana Township 12 South, Range 12 East, Section 5 PCZ-03107 Prepared for: Town of Marana Planning and Zoning 3696 W. Orange Grove Road Tucson, Arizona 85653 Project applicants: Cutler Investments LLS 6913 N. Camino Martin Tucson, AZ 85742 Contractors Yards LLC 3480 Sky Ridge Loop Tucson, Arizona 85742 Prepared by: The Planning Center 110 S. Church Avenue, Suite 6320 Tucson, AZ 85701 Ph. (520) 623-6146 Fax (520) 622-1950 With assistance from: Greg Carlson Engineering Tucson, AZ 85701 Ph. (520) 281-4904 Fax (520) 281-4905 September 2003 Revised: October 2004 Revised: January 2005 For Clarification of Material Contained in this Report Contact: THE PLANNING CENTER 110 S. Church Street, Suite 6320 Tucson, AZ 85701 Telephone (520) 623-6146 Fax (520) 622-1950 Table Of Contents I. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 1 I NTROD UCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 I. Site Analysis and Inventory ................................................................................ 3 A. EXISTING LAND USES. ...... ........... .......... ......... ..... ............. ..... ...................................3 1. Site Location in Regional Context:................................................................................ 3 2. Existing Land Uses on Site: ................... ................. ........ ......... ...... ...............................3 3. Surrounding Property within 1/4 Mile Radius: ...............................................................3 a. Existing Zoning within 1A mile of the site: .....................................................3 b. Existing Land Uses within 1A mile of the site: ...............................................4 d. Pending Rezonings within 1A mile: ...............................................................4 e. Conditional Rezonings: .. .............. ...... .... ........................................... ... ........ 4 f. Subdivisions/Development Plans Approved:................................................... 4 g. Architectural Styles used in Adjacent Projects: ............................................4 4. Well Sites: .................................................................................................................... 5 B. TOPOG RAPHY .......................................................................................................... 11 1. Topographic Characteristics: ......................................................................................11 a. Hillside ConseNation Areas: ...................................................................... 11 b. Rock Outcrops: ..... ......... .............. ........... .......... ............................ .............11 c. Slopes of 15% or greater: ..........................................................................11 2. Pre-development Cross-Slope:................................................................................... 11 C. HyDROLOGy............................................................................................................ 14 1. Offsite Watersheds & Offsite Features Affecting the Site: .......................... ................. 14 2. Acreage of Upstream Off-site Watersheds with 100 Year Discharges Greater than 100 cfs: ............................................................................................................................. 14 3. Onsite Hydrology: ....................................................................................................... 15 D . VEGETATION............................................................................................................ 18 1. Vegetative Communities and Associations on the Site: ......... ....................... .............. 18 2. Significant Cacti and Groups of Trees and Federally-listed Threatened or Endangered Species: ..................................................................................................................... 18 3. Vegetative Densities by Percentage of Plant Cover:................................................... 18 E. WILDLI FE................................................................................................................... 20 1. Arizona Game and Fish Department Letter: ...............................................................20 a. Threatened or Endangered Species: .............................................................. 20 b. High Densities of a Given Species:.................................................................20 c. Aquatic or Riparian Ecosystems: ....................................................................20 2. Other concerns expressed by ADGF: ...........................................................................20 F. VI EWSHEDS.............................................................................................................. 23 1. Viewsheds Onto and Across the Site:......................................................................... 23 a. Views and Vistas from Adjacent Properties: .............................................. 23 b. Impact from Areas Beyond Adjacent Properties: .......................................23 2. Areas of High Visibility from Adjacent Off-Site Locations: ...........................................23 G. TRAFFiC.................................................................................................................... 29 1. Existing and Proposed Offsite Streets: .......................................................................29 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning Table Of Contents 2. All Arterial Streets within One Mile of the Project Site:................................................29 3. Existing and Proposed Intersections or Arterials within One Mile Most Likely to Be Used by Traffic From Site:... ................ ............. .................. ......... ............................... 30 4. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Ways Adjacent to the Site:.......................................... 30 H. RECREATION AND TRAILS.. ....... ............ ........... ..................... ....................... ..........32 1. Existing and Proposed Trails and Recreation Facilities: ............................................. 32 I. CUL TURAUARCHAEOLOGICAUHISTORIC RESOURCES ..................................... 35 1. Location of Resources on Site:................................................................................... 35 2. Arizona State Museum Correspondence: ................................................................... 35 J. McHARG COMPOSITE INFORMATION ........ .......... ..... .............. ........ .......... ............. 38 1. McHarg Composite Map:............................................................................................ 38 II. Land Use Plan......... ..................... ........................................................................... 40 A. OVERVI EW ................................................................................................................ 41 B. TENTATIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.. ........... .................... ..................... ........... ......... 41 C. EXI STI NG LAND USES ............................................................................................. 41 1. Map of Zoning Boundaries and Existing Adjacent Land Uses: .................................... 41 2. Impact On Existing Land Uses On and Off Site: .........................................................41 D. Topography................................................................................................................ 44 1. TPD Response to Topographic Characteristics ..........................................................44 2. Areas of Encroachment.............................................................................................. 44 3. New Average Cross-Slope......................................................................................... 44 E. Hydrology................................................................................................................... 44 1. TDP Response to Hydrological Characteristics ..........................................................44 2. Information and Substantiation for Encroachment / Modification of Drainage Patterns44 3. Potential Drainage Impacts to Off-site Land Uses Upstream and Downstream........... 45 4. Engineering and Design Features to be Used to Address Drainage and Erosion Problems.................................................................................................................... 46 5. Description of how the TDP conforms to area plans, basin management plans and town policies. ............................................................................................................. 46 6. TDP Conformance with Area Plan, Basin Management Plans and Town Policies ...... 46 F. WI LDLI FE................................................................................................................... 49 1. Habitat Disturbance Mitigation and Continuity: ........................................................... 49 G. VI EWSH EDS.............................................................................................................. 51 1 . Offsite Views and Vistas: ............................................................................................ 51 2. Areas of High Visibility:............................................................................................... 51 H. TRAFFiC.................................................................................................................... 51 1. Access Points:............................................................................................................ 51 2. Off-site Road Improvements:...................................................................................... 51 3. ADT Projections: ........................................................................................................ 52 4. Impact on Local Streets:............................................................................................. 52 5. Bicycle and Pedestrian Pathways:.............................................................................. 52 6. On-Site Rights-of Way: ...............................................................................................52 I. PUBLIC UTI LITI ES..................................................................................................... 53 1. Sewer: ........................................................................................................................ 53 2. W ate r ......................................................................................................................... 53 3. Gas:.......................................................................................................................... .53 4. Electric: ...................................................................................................................... 53 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning Table Of Contents J. PUBLIC SERVICE IMPACTS........ ...... ............. ....... ................. ...... ..... ....... ...... .......... 56 1. Police:..... ............. ..... .................... ..................... ................ ...... .......... ........ ................ 56 2. Fi re: ............................................................................................................................ 56 3. Sanitary Pick-up Service: ........................................................................................... 56 4. Schools:..................................................................................................................... 56 5. Parks: ......................................................................................................................... 56 K. RECREATION AND TRAILS.... .......... .................. ............... ........... ..... ....................... 56 1. Recreation Areas Provided:........................................................................................ 56 2. Ownership of Open Space:......................................................................................... 56 3. Access to Offsite Public Trails: ................................................................................... 56 L. CULTURAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES........................ 57 1. Protection of Existing Resources: ............................................................................... 57 2. Incorporation of Resources into the Development ...................................................... 57 3. Measures to Protect/Recover Archaeological/Historic Resources............................... 57 Bibliography.................................................................................................................. ......59 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning Table Of Contents TABLE OF EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT 1.1: Parcel Breakdown ..... ............................ ............................ ..................... ........... 2 EXHIBIT I.A.1: Location and Vicinity Map ............................................................................. 7 EXHIBIT I.A.2: Aerial Photo .................. ....... ..... ........... ...... ......... ........................... ...............8 EXH I BIT I.A.3: Existing Zoning............................................................................................. 9 EXH I BIT 1.A.4: Existing Land Use....................................................................................... 10 EXHIBIT I.B.1: Topography... ................. ..... ............. .......... ............. ............ .............. .........13 Exhibit I.C.2: Off-Site Hydrology / Watershed MapExhibit I.C.3: On-Site Hydrology.......... 16 Exhibit I.C.3: On-Site Hydrology........................................................................................ 17 EXHIBIT 1.0.1: Vegetation Community.............................................................................. 19 Exhibit 1.E.1: Arizona Game and Fish Department Letter ...................................................21 Exhibit I. F.1: Viewsheds Off-Site......................................................................................... 24 Exhibit I. F .2.a: Visibility from Offsite................................................................................... 26 Exhibit I.F.2.b: Site Photos.. ........... .................. ........... ............... ............................ ............27 EXHIBIT I.G .2: Traffic Table.............................................................................................. 31 EXHIBIT I.H.1: Recreation and Trails................................................................................. 34 EXHIBIT 1.1.2: Arizona State Museum Letter ...................................................................... 36 EXHIBIT I.J.1: McHarg Composite Map ............................................................................. 39 Exhibit 11.8.1: Tentative Development Plan ......................................................................... 43 Exhibit II. E: Post Development Hydrology........................................................................... 48 Exhibit II.F.1: Vegetation Buffer ......................................................................................... 50 Exhibit II.J.1: Wastewater Letter ........................................................................................ 54 Exhibit II.J.2: Water Letter.................................................................................................. 55 Exhibit II.M.1: P.A.S.T. Abstract & Summary Form ............................................................. 58 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning I. INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning Land Use Plan INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of an inventory and analysis study recently completed. The purpose of this study was to establish and manifest all of the factors that directly or indirectly influence a rezoning decision in the subject property located south of W. Tangerine Road and east of Breakers Road easement, Marana, Arizona. Rezoning to HI (Heavy Industrial) is requested for development on site. This Development Capability Report is prepared in conformance with the Town of Marana Rezoning Procedural Guide and the Town of Marana Planning Department Rezoning Review Checklist. In addition to visiting the site, this report was compiled utilizing topographic and hydrologic analyses, responses from the appropriate governmental agencies, and background data. The Preliminary Development Plan contained herein responds to the site's opportunities and constraints, while conveying sound engineering and planning priciples. The existing condition for the project site is presently undeveloped land. The proposed development plan encorporates 8 contractors yards, each approximately 28,500 square feet in size. Each yard will be provided adequate parking facilities and a minimum of two (2) 1,800 square foot buildings. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 1 Land Use Plan C <C o IX: en IX: ~ L5 IX: IX] LEGEND o Project Site Parcel Layout TANGERINE ROAD PARCEl 21608013A PARCEl 216080138 EXHIBIT 1.1: Parcel Breakdown BENTA VISTA STREET [2]·····-1-··' G~ THE ¡/ "~'I QJ Ë~~~~G \, ,./ 110 S. C.. URGH AVE.. SUITE1:iJ20 '...../ 1u(:$ON.1V ~57r)1 i~?O·16~~i--!i1.6 o 500 Feet I I Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 2 Land Use Plan I. Site Analysis and Inventory A. EXISTING LAND USES 1. Site Location in Regional Context: The project is 20 acres in size, located south of W. Tangerine Road and east of Breakers Road easement in the Town of Marana, Pima County. The parcel is situated near the north-central boundary of the Town of Marana, Pima County in Section 5, Township 12 South, Range 12 East (see Exhibit LA.1: Location and Vicinity Map). The parcel is currently zoned C (Large-lot zone); assessor's parcel numbers include 216-08-013A and 216-08-013B. This region is currently undergoing a transition from a sparsely populated, predominantly rural area to a patchwork of heavy commercial and industrial uses, higher density suburbs, and planned communities. This growth is irregular and characterized by social and economic diversity-it encompasses heavy commercial and industrial uses, upscale exclusive communities, and low-density horse properties. Existing or planned resorts add another element to the changing economy of the area. 2. Existing Land Uses on Site: Vacant. (See Exhibit LA.2: Aerial Photo). 3. Surrounding Property within 1/4 Mile Radius: a. Existing Zoning within 14 mile of the site: (See Exhibit LA.3: Existing Zoning) · Current Zoning is Town of Marana C (see Exhibit 1.A.3: Existing Zoning). North: Northwest: Northeast: East: West: South: Southwest: Southeast: Town of Marana C (Large Lot Zone) Town of Marana HI (Heavy Industrial) Town of Marana E (Transportation Corridor Zone) Town of Marana C (Large Lot Zone) Town of Marana C (Large Lot Zone) Town of Marana C (Large Lot Zone) Town of Marana E (Transportation Corridor Zone) Town of Marana C (Large Lot Zone) Town of Marana C (Large Lot Zone) Town of Marana C (Large Lot Zone) Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 3 Land Use Plan b. Existing Land Uses within % mile of the site: · (See Exhibit I.A.4: Existing Land Uses). North: Heavy Industrial: Hayden Concrete (Wright Properties LLC), Commercial: Contractors' Yards/Park 'N Shade, Vacant land Vacant Property Vacant Property Heavy Industrial, R & R Storage Facilities (Sandblasting and hitch welding), Commercial: Breakers Water Park, Auto Shop, Vacant Property East: South: West: c. Building Heights: Structures within one-quarter of a mile are a combination of one and two story storage and industrial facilities. d. Pending Rezonings within % mile: Currently, there are no pending rezonings within % mile of the project site. e. Conditional Rezonings: Rezoning, case number PCZ-02082, was approved by the Town of Marana on December 3,2002. The Development Plan and supporting document submittal (case DPR-02103) was approved on June 3, 2003. This project is approximately 25 acres in size and is located directly northwest of the project site. Parcel numbers include for this project site include: 216-08-002B, 216-08-012B, and 216-08-002A. f. Subdivisions/Development Plans Approved: The Contractors' Yards Park 'n Shade development plan was approved on June 3, 2003. g. Architectural Styles used in Adjacent Projects: Breakers Water Park is the only adjacent approved project. Here, architectural style can be defined as an open spaceframe, amusement-ride style waterpark design. The Contractors' Yards Park 'N Shade development plan was approved on June 3, 2003 and Phase I construction is complete. On-site structures will mainly consist of prefab office and storage facilities. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 4 Land Use Plan 4. Well Sites: According to records from the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) and Pima County Land Information Systems, there are fourteen well or water rights located within one-half mile of the project site. One well, registry ID # 858372, is located onsite and owned by Cutler Investments LLS. (See the below table). Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 5 Land Use Plan WelllD Well Type Installation Well Water Casing Type Pump Owner Address City Zip Date DeDth Level Rate Code 615774 Exempt 8/9/1960 382 196 Steel·Perforated 15 AZ State Land 1616 W Phoenix 85007 or slotted casino Deal. Adams 804991 Exempt 8/9/1 960 382 198 Steel-Perforated 17 Davis-Monthan Davis- Tucson 85707 or slotted casing AFB. Monthan 514920 Non- 9/2/1996 400 210 Steel-Perforated 35 Wright Properties 1492 W Tucson 85704 Domestic or slotted casing LLC Montebeela ExemDt Dr. 509253 Domestic 00000000 1000 0 0 0 Fickett PO Box Tucson 85740 Stock 36057 ExemDt 507968 Domestic 6/1/1984 320 166 Steel-Perforated 22 Buhrke Family 325 Willowbr 60514 Stock or slotted casing Enterprises Chantelaine ook ExemDt Court 585372 Exempt 5/23/2001/ 305 167 Plastic or PVC 0 Cutler 10909 N Tucson 85742 Sandra Rd. 501637 Non· 3/26/1982 415 160 Steel-Perforated 0 Breakers 95LLC 8555 W. Marana 85643 Service or slotted casing Tangerine Rd. 611242 Non- 3/15/1980 400 185 Steel-Perforated 100 Fickett PO Box Tucson 85740 ExemDt or slotted casino 36057 507284 Domestic 5/3/1984 345 172 Steel-Perforated 0 Bown, J.L. 7880 N Tucson 85741 Stock or slotted casing Rasmussen Exempt 586280 Exempt 5/26/2001 285 180 Plastic or PVC 0 Pmc Builders LLC 4305 W Tucson 85742 Mesquital delOro 525213 Domestic 12/27/1989 350 162 Steel-Perforated 22 Miller. Michael PO Box Tucson 85740 Stock or slotted casing 35154 ExemDt 500800 Non· 2/22/1982 572 153 Other· Black 165 Bank of America 101 N. l' Phoenix 85002 Service Steel- Iron- AZ Ave. #2050 Seamless 503193 Exempt 7/16/1982 350 168 Steel-Perforated 35 Fickett PO Box Tucson 85740 or slotted casino 36057 503678 Exempt 10/1/1982 347 155 Steel·Perforated 35 Fickett PO Box Tucson 85740 or slotted casing 36057 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 6 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT I.A.1: Location and Vicinity Map j ------- ----- / / .... '\1 w TANG1~L]] .~ - L ---"T '-EF- 1-11 1-- '. I .... -JP.;"LSite . I ':;; ': r BEN \1 ~ ~,,'~~,~ "~, y " ,\: ""-..- """ ~ ~ "- -~ /::;:. ,,~~ "- ,'''"' , ., I '~'~;>::,;-,~' ?,~',-, ¡t--, ' T n,,~~~~?&,< \ ; I I j:<;;'". 111\ \ I 1_ \ : ~, "\~:'>~\.:. \ I: I I·,. / '" i '''\<,~~ \/ J-.__ -.-- ~J i I L~~r? '~~\I¡'-"-?17Jr' "";<> , ~~~I=-'I ~ J~ ,t71 / / I ' ~ f.......;/ ,I I'~ ~:~ ~ ~, ¡ .." / / I / I "'",,-J.L j r.>.::" '~ ". .... 'I·' . '. .1 / T T I' ~:"''c-'- ~,L '>...." '.', j" " T- >' / . "'~J I'~:~I 1\ '~"O L ~ - -- Notes: The project is located in Township 12 South, Range 12 East, Section 5 ParcelID: 216-08-013 A o , 2000 Feet , ~".. ..", æTHE / \. PLANNING . , CENTER \ / ,10:s.c-tURCHAVE.. 6U1TE~J "~.. .../ TU('..$ON.1V' M7Ð1 f~1O·1 ö"~I«S Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 7 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT I.A.2: Aerial Photo - - o . 1000 Feet . f' I:i ~~~~,~~ "... - _.,0 l.I~~¡'I.. IV lb- "11:::\JItw'.i .",,~ Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 8 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT I.A.3: Existing Zoning /,,/ / I / ! \ JI '\ i \ W. TANGERI _ - rT ¡-- 11 ....~ui~_ \> \ ¡ \ .. - " [}--~- _~AJ§t ~'I.'. II; --Jl I j \ -~~+1 . I I _ J .,: ~!:Oject s~!J , --C-·-~Zooe I ' I I I -.L.-.. _..--....~_.."". \1\ ·---~-I ; I I, . . , , ··1-- !J ! legend: BAG B~ C]HI ~ r Agricultural Large Lot Zone TransportaIion Corridor Zone Ught Industrial Heavy Industrial o , 1000Feet , ~'-- .", æTHE i .. PLANNING , ! CENTER \ ... , ,110:s..[¡"'~AVE.. I!IUlTEIiRJ ,.~. -,-" TLCSON IV Ø57M ¡!I:IoI5:':H!146 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 9 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT I.A.4: Existing Land Use o , 1000Feet , [2],,- -.., æTHE / \ PLANNING \ ' CENTER '., , ,/ 110:a. CrlIA'«:J-lAVE., BUill: ö.Jj¡!\J '..'- .../ TUC'.8ON Iv' ð57r)1 (£}oi 115:J:J..ii1.ff1 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 10 Land Use Plan B. TOPOGRAPHY 1. Topographic Characteristics: Existing topography at l' contour intervals is shown on Exhibit 1.8.1: Topography. The site can be generally characterized as a flat, undeveloped parcel. The ground elevation varies by 36 feet from the southwest to the northeast corner. Southwest corner elevation is approximately 2098 feet rising at about 2.4% to the northeast corner elevation of 2134 feet. a. Hillside Conservation Areas: The site is not located within a Hillside Conservation Area. b. Rock Outcrops: There are no rock outcrops on the subject site. c. Slopes of 15% or greater: No areas onsite contain slopes of 15% or greater. d. Other Significant Topographic Features: There are no other significant topographic features onsite. 2. Pre-development Cross-Slope: The average cross slope (ACS) for the entire property is approximately 3.7% based on undeveloped grades. The average cross-slope was calculated by using the formula below: Average Cross Slope = I x L x 0.0023 A Where: I = contour interval L = total length of contours 0.0023 = conversion of "square feet" into "acres x 100" A= total site area in acres The Cross Slope is as follows: CS = (2)(16,396)(0.0023)/20 = 3.77% The grades are conducive to the development. Given this measured cross-slope, the project site is not subject to any Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 11 Land Use Plan development limitations as set forth in Title 19 of the Town of Marana Land Development Code. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 12 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT I.B.1: Topography One Foot Contours L}J'·····1-·····"· æTHE 1'/ \" PLANNING . .! CENTER \ / 110S.C,.. URCHAVE.. SUITEbJ;¿{.I ~',...__./ TUCSON. IV 85701 itJ.?O'16:;3-n146 o I 150 Feet I Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 13 Land Use Plan C. HYDROLOGY 1. Offsite Watersheds & Offsite Features Affecting the Site: The subject parcel is 19.97 acres located in Section 05, Township 12 South, Range 12 east, Gila and Salt River Meridian, within Marana, Arizona, as shown in Figure 1. Figure 2 maps the off-site watersheds affecting the site. The off-site watersheds were delineated using the Pima Association of Governments (PAG) topography. Based on the 20.0' contour interval of the aforementioned topographic mapping, four (4) off-site watersheds were delineated. Runoff from all four off-site watersheds flows onto the subject property from the northeast. The area of the smallest off-site watershed (081) is approximately 0.30 acres of natural vacant land, with a mean slope of 0.03 ft.lft. along its 133' watercourse. OS2 (47.88 acres) with a mean slope of 0.0293 ft.lft. along its 4,922' watercourse also drains natural vacant land, but it includes a small piece of Tangerine Road. OS4 (37.61 acres) with a mean slope of 0.0287 ft.lft. along its 3,375' watercourse also drains natural vacant land south of Tangerine Road. The largest off-site watershed (085) is 419.62 acres, with a mean slope of 0.0319 ft.lft. along its 19,312' watercourse, also drains natural vacant land and a small piece of Tangerine Road. The hydrologic soil types on all four off-site watersheds were determined from the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service General Soils Map of Pima County, AZ, March 1974. The native soil is Anthony- Sonoita labeled as Unit #6 in the General Soils Map of Pima County. Soil Unit #6 is defined as 100% hydrologic soil type B. One (combined) off-site watershed exists downstream of the subject project. It consists of mostly natural vacant land, the parking lot of the Breakers Water Park, some limited light industrial developments, and a large portion of an agricultural field adjacent to Interstate 10. The entire area (upstream and downstream off-site, and on-site watersheds) is within the Tortolita Fan watershed, designated as a "critical" basin. 2. Acreage of Upstream Off-site Watersheds with 100 Year Discharges Greater than 100 cfs: The upstream off-site watersheds continue to undergo developments and associated drainage improvements. Significant alteration of natural drainage patterns occurred with the development of the Hayden Concrete Products plant immediately north and upstream of the subject parcel. A large area east and upstream of the subject parcel was apparently graded level at some undetermined time in the past, but remains undeveloped. A gravel pit, Tangerine Road, and an unpaved road also affect off-site flows reaching the subject parcel, as shown on Figure 3. The off-site watersheds are typical of an alluvial fan with stream courses braiding and splitting downstream, which can change course readily with significant flow events. No other natural or Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 14 Land Use Plan man-made features are noted that may hydrologically affect the subject site. Off-site watersheds OS2 (47.88 acres), OS4 (37.61 acres), and OS5 (419.62 acres) produce 100-year peak flows greater than 100 CFS. See Exhibit I.C.2: Offsite Hydrology / Watershed Map 3. Onsite Hydrology: The entire parcel and surrounding areas are mapped within the FEMA 100-year floodplain (Zone AD) with a depth of 2.0' and a velocity of 6 fps, as shown on FIRM number 04019C-0995 K. No federally mapped floodways exist on site. The parcel receives off-site flows greater than 100 CFS from the northeast. On-site watersheds DA2, DA4, and DA5 all receive off-site flows greater than 100 CFS from their respective off- site watersheds. The off-site flow affecting DA 1 is only 1.7 CFS. DA3 begins on-site and is therefore not affected by off-site flows. None of the on-site watersheds produce 100-year peak flows greater than 100 CFS. The entire parcel experiences runoff as unconcentrated sheetflows, with the minor exceptions of small poorly defined channels. The subject parcel consists of natural vacant land with sparse Sonoran Desert vegetation. A 100-year peak discharge of 178.8 CFS was estimated as entering the northeast comer of the property (DA2) from OS2, and a 100-year peak discharge of 155.3 CFS was estimated as entering the western portion of the property (DA4) from OS4. A 100- year peak discharge of 859.3 CFS was estimated as entering the southeastern comer of the property (DA5) from OS5, the largest off- site watershed. A 100-year peak discharge of only 6.5 CFS was estimated as leaving the subject property under existing conditions from the northwest comer (DA 1), and a 100-year peak discharge of 180.3 CFS was estimated as leaving the subject property under existing conditions from the northern portion (DA2). DA3 only produces a 100- year peak discharge of about 17.4 CFS, which exits the property along the western boundary. A 100-year peak discharge of 180.6 CFS leaves the subject parcel from DA4 along the southwestern boundary. A 100-year peak discharge of 850.1 CFS exits the parcel along its southeastern property boundary from DA5. Existing drainage conditions along the downstream (western and southern) property line consist of sheet flow and small sandy channels that drain over mostly undeveloped vacant desert land towards the aforementioned agricultural fields and the Santa Cruz River. See Exhibit I.C.3: On-Site-Hydrology Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 15 .,.. - Land Use Plan Exhibit I.C.2: Off-Site Hydrology I Watershed Map H.Jt FC'::r-,¡D t.: ~ ~ - -'<!f J'~'c ',.- ->j f-'.(.i >.¡" ! in,"'" ! ~/. -", æTHE '.' \. PLANNING , ; CENTER \. ./ 110 s.Ç"UJRCHAVE.. 5U1TEI)J2tI ........ ../ TlJC'...Q¡()N N Mro, f~ì tw~"I-ti146 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 16 Land Use Plan ----- Exhibit I.C.3: On-Site Hydrology ~ :,:-Ni', ~ r ~' CID ~~NNING '. , CI:) CENTER \. .c 110S.C;URCHAVE. 5UITE,)~:J -"--. ...-'-- ìU(~$QN.1V /:!S7!r1 (,~'-:>Oi tc';¡.....'M5 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 17 Land Use Plan D. VEGETATION 1. Vegetative Communities and Associations on the Site: The habitat surrounding the site consists primarily of mixed shrub - palo verde (Cercidium spp.) - desert ironwood (Olneya tesota) association. There were no saguaro cacti (Carnegiea gigantea) noted on the property, and very few noted on adjacent areas. Native trees noted on the property consist of a mixture of palo verde, desert ironwood, catclaw acacia (Acacia greggit), and velvet mesquite (Prosopis velutina). Vegetation removal has reduced the native species found on the property mainly to trees and barrel cacti (Ferocactus wislizenit). 2. Significant Cacti and Groups of Trees and Federally-listed Threatened or Endangered Species: Native trees noted on the property consist of a mixture of palo verde, desert ironwood, catclaw acacia, and velvet mesquite. (See Exhibit 1.D.1: Vegetation Communities). Arizona Game and Fish Department was contacted regarding special status species information associated with the project area. The Department's Heritage Data Management System (HDMS) was accessed and current records do not indicate the presence of any special status species as occurring in the project vicinity (2-mile buffer). 3. Vegetative Densities by Percentage of Plant Cover: An inventory of the native plants on the property was performed on August 15, 2001. An inventory summary, calculation of mitigation trees, and summary of the total plants included in the landscape area upon project completion has been provided and conditionally accepted by Town of Marana staff in a letter dated December 20,2001. Vegetation Densities were calculated as follows: · High Density: 67%-100% · Medium Density: 34%-66% · Low Density: 0%-33% There are no areas of high-density vegetation onsite. The site consists entirely of low-density vegetation. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 18 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT I.D.1: Vegetation Community '"./ ,,'~? '/f" / /' /,.' ;/ .' .// /' // / /' /' ./ / ./ ./ ;/./ / ,./ / ../ Y,/ '11'<0 / / / ;,,""-. ;/ / ./ / / // / '.. /'-/'. ; /o' .' v /': / ./ ././ /// / ./ //// / ·/;~~V' ,.- /" "'" /~' /" ;./ .-/,' , "." /., "" ./ / ../. ~. . ,/. ./,/ ¿ "'12'" Y/. '././. ./,/ . /.' / / /,/ " ." / ¿ . '-.. .... ./ / '. <'./ / ,." / l' .. ./ ./ / / ,./,.. / / .' , "../ ..///.//.//'///./¿// / / '. / '.. /,/ / / /'../ /. / .... . . '. . ,',''':,''-'':'-...,..' ..:. / "., // ",'-', '-',' ,-Y '_f/ .'/- .' "'/ . ./. ./ , / / / .'. /;15..,...-.......,// '. ". .....//y.... ./.. "-j"" i' ',"---: ,:(,;},:,.:>, .;/',j/' ,/ ' ",' .,;,', _ _, " ../ ./_',< / ".' .</ / ./.. / / /' ./ ,.../ ;/ ./" . / . / ....,.. . / .' / // ;/ /' ;/ ,/./ ';/'/./'./ ///' / ;- . / / /. /'. /, /';.'. ;' . / / .... .' ../ j /. / .~. ,. ;/ /. ./ ;/. .213G /...... / ./,/ / / / / / "../,../. ..../. ....../... / , . /. ..,.. '.. .B.../. /. /..' /.' .../../ /. / ./ / /j /1'.\ '. / ./ /_.. / . '. ./ ./ .. / Y. .. -/ ./ ./ /....../... /. . ././ /: './ . ..' ........d. ..' /....... /./....... /....~. /..'../' ... ./ / / / /' . ., / '7 //,.. ,:.// . .' //. .../.,,/...'.....'.../.... /' // //,/'://.. ;eð' /V....... .c/.c· // ' ,/./ / / / ,'. './... ..' / . /. / ./ / )-: ,/ /""./. '/', / /// 2~4 '. /,//<,// .// y./ .//.'./ /.~/../. /...../.....//>~.1 /.. ././.............;¡..../ ,.//.. //Y. //..'.' ···..//0·/.·· /,/ //'> // '. .., . , /./ / /.. /." .."", ..../'../... ......./.. ...../.. ..'/ ..../7/).../.. .. /............/ .Ä. ..ly'//./. .//.. /'/. / /./ .'. // ./~~ .' .., '..' .. '/. .. /.-.. '$ . '., .' ,/ . /" . cy .~. .... ..... //.... . '. /. //.. '/.., /. . .'./ /.'. ". ~/.'.'/.." ..-...... '. /, // /../ / / ...../ / ,/!:02X·//' .... "" , .' ,/ ,/, v;¡/ ./." . . '-' · / y'19/ . / ../,../ 'ì/'::' . // . Y. ;//....., . / ..... ,... /". ...../..~/..... ." ,/.//......../"'./. /. .../...../../..(.,/'/... /. ..... /./......./....' '5)' .... '/ / /''/ /"j/"'~/ .' /'./..' . ". ,//.,Y./. ,·Y'.,/.·..·Y'.·j....'.:/·. /.... /./·./..·....'....'..¿..,/.i.,././.'. ./ . / .' ../ . 7··./~. ,/ //, . ,". ... // ~'.... .../. . /'.... ;/. .'ý;.'//.. /,/ , . .. ./ ". . /. - '. //'. '. . , '" / /.- ,.¡.: " " ',',,, ','.'.' ..... . ..../ " r ./ ..:/..//...../.. './,,/, ;/...../...X ....../...../... ,/ \/ .'/' ".. ,/ ./ ". /.... . ...... ./,/ '. '.' ,............/....: /. ..' /........ /'. ./'.. '/.' ···X.· ...../. ...-./ '../ / . / / '/ /../.... . . , "";-. ,/ / ./ ..4;', / /// / // //. /,' ""'0//. / : / .. ""'.// ,// /., '"? // ,/ /. ' " // /"", /.i ./ ./ ,/. ./ / '. ./ //.. '. .\:? / / /,:./ ./ /..'/,/.. ./ ,'. / /? / . / , - /. ./ ,.'.0 //.' // /'" 2.~.~o/. /.'. /" /<5' j/..//....... / //;. "':/ // / Y ./ ..' ,/ . ... / /-,/ / .. .../'.'G."'./.../',./...//. /,/ /. ·./X·, .//' ./'/' /'//.'0/.."'./'" ::/. " '7" ',,/" ,-/ ',' / .,," ',! ..... ' .... /-;7 .....' ':~" //V' ./. J ,/. /.' . ,,/ / /,;''.' /... /. '../;/)/ '/' ,/ :'/;''.':é'' /. /././ / ./. ," " ./ ,,/ . .... ./ ,/ ./ " '.' . ./ , . / / / .' ./ ,/ ..:., '. / / /. ,/. //. ./ /. /.' .../.// /.. ...,:...'............, ....;/.. . / ,/ / . .,'. .,' ../ ..../ .' ./.. /. .'./'. ,/. /..Y /.. . / ..,/, ,/ /y' '.// ,/ , . /./,/. /.... /.... /. /' /. / ./.' '. / .. / :/.,./ ,... / .//.. ./ <1.1:,.."'.' . / ./ '. /';/ ) ,',..., /J;(V :/ . ,/ ,/ ../. . / . '..' /" ..,/ /; / ./ ,/.... ..::, ". "J ' ",'., ,'. "/" ",' ,.- ',r "/ ,," .._.~", ,/ / / / /.2./ ./. /<'77./ / /::..x,·· ,./ ./ -./ . / . /6i . //.. '.' ./. .0_'/ /:....:;(..;... / .... .;.>. " /. ./". ,5',/ , //'." / :/ '..L.'~." / // ,/ '(,b /. / // , '.,/ '/ / .,.. ./ / /' / . / . /"" / ,/. " . ..' . / ...'/''/ ,'" -. -" -··_i,r /-" _'./_ / //"'~ ',' ,/' /,. , , ;/ ,. / / , . , . /. .'. /. . '/ " '.":,, ;.'// /'./ - /', /' ,I', / :.< _/"" ",', , .,~ ./ ;/ / ;/ ,/ ,/ /... . / / ./ . EZ2J Mixed Scrub of the Palo Verde, Desert Ironwood Association One Foot Contours o , 360 Feet ~/I··" æTHE ,/ .. PLANNING , . CENTER .., ,/ 110S.C-IURCHAVE..6UITE!;iJ:'¿'J '..... ,./ llJl:iSON, w ~~7r)1 ~'OI6r:1""14(5 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 19 Land Use Plan E. WilDLIFE 1. Arizona Game and Fish Department Letter: The Arizona State Game and Fish Department has reviewed their Department's Heritage Data Management System and current records do not inducate the presence of any special status species as occurring in the project vicinty (2-mile buffer). Additionally, this letter indicates that the project site occurs within proposed Critical Habitat for the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl. Currently, the project site is not located within critical habitat. Further, an approved Native Plant Permit has been obtained for the project site. Since this time, the site has been significantly cleared of vegetation. A letter from the Arizona State Game and Fish Department is included in this report (See Exhibit I.E. Arizona Game and Fish Department Letter). a. Threatened or Endangered Species: According to the A.G.F.D., no special status species occur within the project vicinity (2-mile buffer). b. High Densities of a Given Species: No high densities of a given species are known to exist on the project site. c. Aquatic or Riparian Ecosystems: The Pima County Critical and Sensitive Habitat Map indicates no hydroriparian or mesoriparian areas on-site. The nearest habitat is located a little over % mile northeast of the project site. The Critical and Sensitive Habitat Map displays critical wildlife habitat based on the University of Arizona's Dr. Shaw study contracted by Pima County DOTFCD (Department of Transportation Flood Control District) in 1986. 2. Other concerns expressed by ADGF: The Game and Fish Department mentioned that because Arizona is large and diverse with plants, animals, and environmental conditions that are ever changing, many areas contain species not noted. Further, the Department would appreciate the opportunity to provide an evaluation of impacts to wildlife habitats associated with project activities occurring in the subject area, when specific details become available. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 20 Land Use Plan Exhibit I.E.1: Arizona Game and Fish Department Letter 2221 WEST GREENWAY ROAD, PHOENiX, AZ 85023-4399 (602) 942-3000 . AZGFD.COM GOVER~, JANE:" NÁ':,'Ì"ANO COMMJSSIONERS CHAIRMAN. JOE CARTER SAFfJH.D SU5.6.N E. CHILTON. ARI\'ACf', W. P.AYS GILSTRA~, PliOENIX JOE MELTON, YUM'" MfCHAEi.M. GOU~H¡LY. rLA6S'rAr~'" DIRECTOR DuANE L. SHROUH DEPU'TY DIRECTOR STF.VE K. FERREU THE STATE OF ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT April 24, 2003 - Mr. Ted Herman [he Planning Centcr 110 S. Chw-ch Suite 6320 Tucson. AZ 85701 Rc: Special Status Species Infonl1ation for Township 12 South, Range 12 East, Section 5; Rezoning in Town of Marana. Dear Mr. Herman: The Arizona Game and Fish Department (Department) has reviewed your letter, dated April 16,2003, regarding special status species information associated with the above- referenced project area. The Department's Hcritage Data Management System (HDMS) has been accessed and current records do not indicate the presence of any special status species as occurring in the project vicinity (2-mile buffer). In addition, this project occurs within proposed Critical Habitat for the cactus ferruginous pygmy- O\vL l11e Department's HDMS data are not intcnded to include potential distribution of special status species. Arizona is large and diverse with plants, animals, and environmental conditions that are ever changing. Consequently. many areas may contain species that biologists do 110t know about or species prc\iously noted in a particular area may no longer occur there. Not all of Arizona has been surveyed tor special status species, and surveys that have been conducted have varied greatly in scope and intensity. Making available this information does not substitute for tllC Departmem"s revie\V of project proposals, and should not decrease our opportunities to review and evaluatc new project proposals and sites. The Departmcnt is also concemed about other resource values. such as other wild]iie, including gamc species, and wildlife-related recrcation. The Department would appreciate the opportunity to provide an evaluation of impacts to wildlife or wildlifc habitats associated with project activitics occurring in the subjcct area. when spccific dctails becomc available. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY REASONASI.E ACCOMMOD" TIONS AGENCY Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 21 Land Use Plan Arizona Game & Fish Department Letter cont'd Mr Ted Herman April 24. 2003 1f YOll have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (602) 789-3618. Gcneral status information and county distribution lists for special status species are also available on our new web site at http://wvl'w.azgíèLcom/hdms, as well as some abstracts for special status species. Sincerely. i/Ì7"t j(/~~/) Sabra S. Schwartz Heritage Data Management System, Coordinator SSS:ss ce: Bob Broseheid. Project Evaluation Program Supervisor Joan Scott Habitat Program Manager, Region V AGFD# 04-2J-03(J4) Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 22 Land Use Plan F. VIEWSHEDS 1. Viewsheds Onto and Across the Site: a. Views and Vistas from Adjacent Properties: (See Exhibit I.F.1: Viewsheds Off-Site). b. Impact from Areas Beyond Adjacent Properties: Views and vistas of properties surrounding the project site will be minimally impacted. Properties to the northwest of the project site will experience no impact to their views and vistas. Properties south and southwest will have a minimal impact on their views of the distant Tortolita Mountain Range. There will be no impact to viewsheds experienced by properties southeast of the project site. Western adjacent properties distant viewsheds of the Santa Catalina Mountain Range will be slightly impacted depending on building pad(s) placement. The most significant impact will be experienced by adjacent properties northeast and east of the site. Immediate viewsheds of 1-10 and the Tucson Mountain Range will be impacted. Here, base views of this viewshed may be cut off. 2. Areas of High Visibility from Adjacent Off-Site Locations: The areas of high visibility occur along the northern edge of the project site adjacent to Hayden Concrete as well as the southwestern portion of the project site near the R & R Storage Facility yards. Areas of medium visibility occur just behind areas of high visibility along the northern and southwestern project site areas. Areas of low visibility exist throughout the remaining areas of the project site. These areas are displayed in Exhibit I.F.2.a: Visibility From Offsite and Exhibit I.F.2.b: Site Photos. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 23 Land Use Plan Photo 1- Looking southeast across project site from adjacent northwestem property Photo 3- Looking in a northwest direction from property southeast of the project site. The end of the Tortolita Mountain Range is visible on the right. Exhibit I.F.1: Viewsheds Off-Site Photo 2- Looking northeasterly across property towards Tortolita Mountain viewshed from adjacent midwestern property Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 24 Land Use Plan Photo 5- Looking southwest across the project site towards 1_ 10 and the Tucson Mountain Range from the adjacent eastern property midway along the project site. .ra... Exhibit I.F.1: Viewsheds Off Site cont'd Photo 4- Looking east across northern portion of the project site towards the Santa Catalina Mountain Range from the adjacent western property Photo 6- Looking northwest across project site from the midpoint of the adjacent western property Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 25 Land Use Plan Exhibit I.F.2.a: Visibility from Offsite ~~----~--_.~---_.. '0/ High Visibility Meduim Visibility ~ Low Visibility o I 360 Feet ____ _ _____J U'/l-···' PðTHE / \, PLANNING " ' CENTER \ / 110S.C....URCHAVE..5UITE1;;iJ2"J "--" ../ TUC:SON. IV 1:157r)1 i!)?O'I fi":HiI46 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 26 Land Use Plan Photo 1- Looking southwest rom northern property towards existing commercial/industrial development Photo 2- Looking southwest across the project site towards Breakers Water Park, Arizona Portland Cement, and the Tucson Mountain Range Exhibit I.F.2.b: Site Photos Photo 2- Looking north northeast at Hayden Concrete from the northern project border Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 27 Land Use Plan Site Photos cont'd Photo 4- Looking south across mid property line towards the Tucson Mountain Range Photo 5- Looking north along the eastern property boundary towards Hayden Conrete and the Tortolita Mountain Range Photo 6- Looking south at the Tortolita Mountain Range from the midpoint of the project site Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 28 Land Use Plan G. TRAFFIC 1. Existing and Proposed Offsite Streets: The subject property is located to the southeast of the corner of the intersection of Tangerine Road and Breakers Road Easement. Tangerine Road is currently comprised of a 100' existing right-of-way. A number of smaller, braided washes that drain the mountain foothills bisect Tangerine Road. Due to its location at the base of the Tortolitas, Tangerine Road is located within a broad alluvial fan, subject to sheetflow flooding. Breakers Road easement is a 60' easement for ingress/egress as well as utilities (further information can be found in DKT. 5996/0913). This road was paved at one time, however, this road has not been maintained and is in need of repair. 2. All Arterial Streets within One Mile of the Project Site: Refer to Exhibit I.G.2: Traffic Table for general information about roads within one mile of the project site. a. Existing and proposed rights-of-way: See Exhibit I.G.2 b. Whether or not said widths conform to minimum requirements: Widths conform to minimum requirements c. Ownership: See Exhibit I.G.2 d. Whether or not rights-of-way jog or are continuous: Both Tangerine Road and Breakers Road will have continuous rights-of-way along the project site. e. Number of lanes and theoretical capacity and design speed for existing roads: Existing condition-Tangerine Road is a two-way paved road with a 50 mph speed limit f. Present average daily traffic for existing streets: See Exhibit I.G.2 g. A description of the surface conditions of existing roadway providing access to project site: Conditions can be described as fair h. A program for completion of roadway and intersection improvements: See Exhibit I.G.2: Traffic Table Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 29 Land Use Plan 3. Existing and Proposed Intersections or Arterials within One Mile Most Likely to Be Used by Traffic From Site: The only intersection within one mile of the project site that will be used with any frequency is the Breakers Road easement (providing access to Breakers Water Park) and Tangerine Road intersection. 4. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Ways Adjacent to the Site: There are no bicycle or pedestrian ways adjacent to the project site. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 30 Land Use Plan Existin R.O.W. UltirnateRO.W. Existing Travel Lanes Posted Seed PresentADT Tan erine Road 100' 400' 2 (AlC Pvmt.) 50 MPH 6,700 ADT from 1-10 east to Thorn dale Rd. No Marana In TIP- Tangerine Rd. 1. Breakers Rd. to Wild Burro- Reconstruct No start or finish dates 2. Wild Burro to Thornydale- Reconstruct with drainage improvements No start or finish dates **Both ro'ects s onsored b Marana EXHIBIT I.G.2: Traffic Table Breakers Road Easement N/ A-easement 60' Unknown No Surroundin landowners *The rezoning development Plan for Contractors' Yards/Park and Shade (DPR-02103) is proposing adding 24' of new pavement onto the centerline of Breakers Road easement. Note: 'No improvements are shown in the Pima Association of Governments' Transportation Improvement Program, Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 31 Land Use Plan H. RECREATION AND TRAILS 1. Existing and Proposed Trails and Recreation Facilities: According to the 1989 Eastern Pima County Trail System Master Plan, the 1996 Pima County Master Plan hiking trails in eastern Pima County, and the recently adopted Town of Marana Trail System Master Plan, there are two trails located within approximately one mile of the subject property (See Exhibit I.H.: Recreation and Trails). Table 1: Inventory of Candidate Trails provides information on these trails. Two trails and one bike route are located within a one-mile radius of the project site. The Wild Burro Wash (approx. .54 miles west/northwest of the project site) is defined as a Primary Trail. This trail runs from Wild Burro Canyon/Foothills Trail in the W. Tortalitas to the CAP Primary Trail. Wild Burro Wash was given first priority status because it provides access to a very important canyon in the Tortalitas. Wild Burro Canyon, which goes into the heart of the Tortalitas, contains the only two developed hiking trails in the area. EI Camino de Manana Wash (approx. .64-.75 mile east/northeast of the project site) is defined as a Secondary Trail under the Pima County Master Plan hiking trails in eastern Pima County. The Trail runs south along a portion of Thornydale Rd. to Moore Rd., then SW in wash to an intersection with a pipeline located in T12S, R12E. Two additional Primary Trails fall within a 1.5-mile radius of the project site. The Central Arizona Project Canal Primary Trail exists approximately 1.38 miles west/northwest of the project site. Lastly, the Santa Cruz River Primary Trail is located approximately 1.34 miles southwest of the project site. (See Exhibit I.H: Recreation and Trails) Several local trails are outside of the one-mile radius, but in the project vicinity according to the Town of Marana Trail System Master Plan (2000). These include trails #179: Power Transmission Line and #164: Scottie's Loop. Also in the vicinity are the Acacia Hills Neighborhood Trails. Local trails provide access to the larger trail system. They are generally located along existing rights-of-way, utility easements, and within washes and drainage ways. Neighborhood trails provide connectivity among subdivisions and community facilities. They are generally located along neighborhood streets, sidewalks, utility easements, and within washes and drainage ways. The North 1-10 frontage Road Bike Route, running both east and west, is located approximately .80 mile southwest of the project site. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 32 Land Use Plan Table 1: Inventory of Candidate Trails Trail Description .. . I Candidate Trail Trail Wash Cross- Road Utility Linear Whole Foot Horse Bike Trail Map Type Country Row Esmt Park Access Cod ROW e Wild Burro 36 C X X X Wash EI Camino 158 L X X X X de Manana Wash Power 179 L X X X X Transmission Line Scottie's 164 L X X X X Loop Segment Central 3 P X X X X X Arizona Proiect Santa Cruz 8 P X X X X X River Primary Trail Trail Type Code: P = Primary Trail, C = Connector Trail, L = Local Trail Bike Code: RB = Road Bike, MB = Mountain Bike Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 33 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT I.H.1: Recreation and Trails ~ ! /, ,ij ff l J if ~, .~ "~:;, ''- ~ "~ ~. '~, ", '. ~, , '. '. , , -. '. , , -. ~ , , '. ~ , , '. '. , , '. ", " Þ '. , , '. '. '. RllLlTO VI 'A... ',~ NEIGHBO OOQ,.~ '. " , '. '. , , '. '. , , '. ""~~~ "0" "~~ ',~~ '~.'?ð,.. o Pro'ad -] L. " \, "'-,.,.--- ".~ ...'-...., ~~.. "~ ' Rd. . "~.",,',.,, ~~..''------- ~" '-.... ~....,.. \"-'. ';" '. :.~. \ "'\', \~:~~..~.... . '. ........ ',- '...... ........, ~.,. ."" , ' -. , , '. -- , " '- \~" ",~. .~ ~.' ~~end '/\v/Trails t:J River Park _ Rillito VISta Neighborhood Park C Project Site Parœllayout [2],'- -...., æTHE ! \ PLANNING , , CENTER \... ./ 110S.C>-tURCHAVE.. 511HE~ ..._~ .,/ 1\.JC...'VJN. IV 6571}1 i~?o'16¡;3-fi1"6 o 2500 Feet , , Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 34 Land Use Plan I. CUL TURAUARCHAEOLOGICAUHISTORIC RESOURCES 1. Location of Resources on Site: Dr. David Stephen of P.A.S.T. (Professional Archaeological Services of Tucson) conducted a 1 person-day, survey of the Widger/Cutler property on July 4, 2003. Survey results revealed no surface indications of archaeological resources on the property which meet the Arizona State Museum minimum standard for recording as an archaeological site or that would be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. A total of 0 isolated artifacts of non-site features were noted. 8ased on the archival information, field methods, the observable surface indications and because none of the materials observed on the subject property have potential to provide important archaeological or historical information beyond what was obtained for this project, P.A.S.T. supports approving the rezoning application. 2. Arizona State Museum Correspondence: The Arizona State Museum (ASM) was consulted for the two parcels that compose the project site. A review of the records revealed that parcel #216-08-013A had been surveyed in July 2002, while parcel #216-08-0138 had not been inspected for significant archaeological sites. The ASM recommended a surface inspection for the "8" parcel. Since that time, a full site inspection was conducted on both parcels in July 2003 (see above paragraph and Appendix A: Cultural Resources Survey). The survey revealed no significant site on the subject property and therefore, no other achaeological studies are recommended. If ground disturbing activities reveal any significant materials a registered archaeologist and the ASM will be contacted (if appropriate) according to ARS §41-841. If any human remains or funery objects are discovered, the ASM will be contacted immediately according to ARS §41-865 and §41-844. A letter from the Museum is provided as Exhibit 1.1.2: Arizona State Museum Letter. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 35 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT 1.1.2: Arizona State Museum Letter . \rL~d¡k ,-1l,;¡!( \iust:l:n PC' h!',^ 2100~i(';' TUi'-':.)11 \Z~15~':]-¡X'2() 62J-f1lì]: 62 ~~9-i6 THE UNIVERSiTY Or ARIZONA '. TUCSON ARIZONA May 5, 1003 Ted Herman, Planner rhe Planning Center 1 ìO S, Church SL Suite 6320 Tucson, AZ 85701 RE. Archaeological Records Check for rezollÍng of parcel #2IG-08-0J3A, approx, 20 ¡¡çres. Breakers Rd south of Tangerine Rd.. Marana. AZ, See 5 TI28 RI2E. GiJa & SaJ! River Baseline & Meridian. Dear Mr. Hemlan On Aprill?, 2003,The Arizona State Museum (ASM) received a request concerning the above mentioned property. On April 2 j, J sent YOll a letter indicating that the property had onîy been surveyed by students and therefore required sUf\!ey by a professional archaeologist This letter was in enor. While researching a nearby request (your letter of May 1. :Wü3), I discQvert:>-<'\ that Mr. David Stephen ofP.A.S.T. (PTofe:;¡;ional ArehaeologicaI Services of Tucson) had sUf\'eyed and recommended dearance for parcel #2 i6-08-013A in a report done on JuIy25, 2002 The ASM concurs with his recommendations. Please pardon the enor in my previous letter. We arc working to correct the problems our filing ba.cklog some.time!'. causes, but mis£ed this partku1ar report. I hope you receive this letter before any serious inconvenience has occurred. ffyou have any questions, please do not hesitate to call mc, Sincerdy, \"~.../ {,..~,- So. Bcnaron A ssistant Permits Administratol (520)62J-2096 ~.)çllil1Q!.J.@cmaIi. arizona. edu ~ ~ Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 36 Land Use Plan Arizona State Museum Letter Cont'd !i'i£ LU..;!\'[!ZSfU ;"F ARIZONA, lUi50N ARJlO'-i l\'!íJ\') ?()~~}3 cd ,I lerman, rlarmel rhe PJanmng CentCJ 10 S Churt'h S¡ Sui h.: bX'O ¡¡çson A/85701 flY ,"\:. \w",il'gl,·ti; rkl¡nL (he.", fen R'i. 1\1~13nd ,\l S¡,cii"p: r ,::Y ~'.I:;ì ,Gilh (jfpnt'(:ei I{ ¿ ¡6-0H~OLH3, ßn"(!};çf,,\ KG '::'~lutÌ1 <:)f r~1r~gt"'rHJ(, Sail Rh'er Baseline'" Me,;( ian I'lear 'r,·/tl t-l\~l¡na¡'1 Un h, 2!)Ci\1JK Arizona SI¡HC Museum (ASMì recei"ed (1 n:;qucsl \:onccrníng ¡he above memioncd pmper1\, I have consulted our archaeological æcords which indicate lht" Jand In has 1W1 been inspected for archaeologIcal s¡te~: fhe !\S!--,) rcconmlc:ndo; :\n arcbaeoJogicaì ;'hlxtil.£ç in~pec!ion to determme If impmianl vel unn::pür!ed prdlrstüric i.H hi),lonc ,,!Íe~ ¡¡!'t: on the, land. A h~t of a ¡uchaeolflgicai contrac:tlJrs i~ a\ß i !able tin Q11I webs;t!.': at http: "w'''';w <;talemu~eurn arizona e,dulprofsvcs,penruls'penniHees Wip SUI fä\:c·¡ospeciivn required undtr \.;il,\ 01 COIW\\ ürdmurK<.:' or a ¡;c'dCILlI re¡lu!;HIOI1 wii! n:,¡uire a \willen report desl'nbing Ih..: results onlle S¡¡¡JÜcç inspediol1 cl.nct wil! include rc(omnwndalm!ìs. í Îì¡;; ;;n:haeologíq YOli select should pn;parc YOU! report using Ih~' standards !Í!ltd Siandatâ\' For (·ondllC{II1,1? and ( '¡dumd J(CV(>l.lt{ ',;" !\tost CtH1t!'a':I-Op: in l\rizona ha\~~ a copy of these :~iandnrds. ï uU. d1e ill, r!tJ\~ÙHlg H~l' !t':porl ttt the appropfiat\o' oJT!\.r, H:qu!:ing Chi;; \\'ht:n smt¡lCl' Impectíons afe required. the archaeoìogiq w¡Ji n!:-:o wbminc,J or yoU! reporf ,nlhe appn.lj)fiate an:hat'ologic;;j :-;ite Ilk uff,C,'. ¡f navc "(¡i~'(h~d ¡m a!ï:hat'oîogi,¡; from the list provided, that contractor kno\\',: wilc!c ¡Hid \\111.'11 1". suomi¡ n:pmb ¡ ¡ "r1l~ fltr.;,'( ~H:\ de not !is's ¡ (¡.¡k to ca1! ~1 ,e. ,~~\) Bcnarr,~ 1 \·'si"t:.m! I\:nni¡s \d,mrnstratur ¡ ,,~i\j(.:i(' ;;bepam1tß;t;ljJªtLanzoj1a eQu œ~ ~[Ð Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 37 Land Use Plan J. McHARG COMPOSITE INFORMATION 1. McHarg Composite Map: The composite map graphically illustrates the summation of constraints identified during the inventory and analysis process. Information regarding topography, hydrology, vegetation, wildlife, and views has been combined to form the McHarg Composite Map displayed as Exhibit I.J.1: McHarg Composite Map. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 38 Land Use Plan EXHIBIT I.J.1: McHarg Composite Map - -. Q u () (,6 CFS 1 b~.:3 (:¡.:.;s Lf03 CFS (.t".., '7ACFS , ~ -. ,:,;-::-- Î '., ,-' \ - . G , ~ \'~I~ 130.6 CFE: ;j~O.'~ C 1- S i High Visibility Medium Visibility Low Visibility Noles: 1. Vegetation Covers the Site and Consists of Mixed Scrub and Palo Verde 2. No Wildlife Areas Exist OlHllte due to grading of the site In accordance with the NNPO of October 2001 o 300 Feet , ~/ -'" Qt)THE / \ aD PLANNING \, ./ "o~.G-i""~:V~.~~T~=J "~.. _...>' TlX".8ON W M7D1 i'~al6T; -<H'0$6 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 39 Land Use Plan II. Land Use Plan Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 40 Land Use Plan A. OVERVIEW The total area of the proposed project consists of approximately 20 acres. The two parcels that compose the project site will contain 8 total contractors yards, each with two leasable lots. Each of the contractors yards are approximately 28,500 square feet in size. Each yard will contain two 1 ,800 square foot non-combustible steel building structures. The buildings will provide indoor storage space if necessary. Approximately 22 total parking spaces will be provided in each contractors yard. The tentative development plan shows 354 parking spaces following the Town of Marana Code (Section 22.030) which states there should be 1 112 parking spaces per employee for warehousing uses. This assumes approximately 14 employees per leasable space. Access to the contractor yard facilities will be provided via an easement extending eastward off the Breakers Road easement. This easement travels along the northern border of parcel 216-08-012B (Contractors' Yards/Park 'N Shade) and intersects the project site at its northwestern corner. It will be chip-sealed to provide for all-weather access to the site. From here, another 29.5' chip-sealed access road will extend south along the western project border to the midpoint of parcel 216-08-0138, thus providing access to both the northern and southern four contractors yards. A combination of chain link fence and decorative concrete walls will be used to sceen the property and the trash areas. B. TENTATIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN A Tentative Development Plan acetate is included in the pocket at the end of this report. Also refer to Exhibit II.B.1. C. EXISTING LAND USES 1. Map of Zoning Boundaries and Existing Adjacent Land Uses: Please Refer to Exhibit I.A.4: Existing Land Uses, for project zoning boundaries and existing adjacent uses. 2. Impact on Existing Land Uses On and Off Site: Currently, there are no existing uses onsite; therefore, there will be no onsite impacts. There will be minimal if any offsite impacts. The proposed project is appropriate to surrounding development, which is mainly composed of heavy commercial and industrial uses. Hayden Concrete and Contractors' Yards/Park 'N Shade occupy the majority of property north of the project site. R & R Storage Facilities (sandblasting and hitch welding), Breakers Water Park, a auto repair shop, and vacant pieces of land; one of which has been cleared exist east of the project site. There are no existing uses south or east of the Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 41 Land Use Plan project site. This pattern can be characterized as general commercial/industrial uses. There are no residential units or planned communities that are affected by the proposed development. However, the General Plan does identify the area to the east for potential residential development. An appropriate buffer will be placed along the eastern boundary to buffer the potential impacts. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 42 Land Use Plan Exhibit 11.8.1: Tentative Development Plan ACC5f::;:~ EASfJfIEfIf! "kW IÆAAEftS KC ¡ .............,t_ ,.-----,:-.--~:~=:_----..&¢~,."E --,f !' illEÆR"'~ '.J -,;',,~~ - - 71'; -~---- )¡ ( -rm-C---------------------------------~=~---- , ~ L-¡ \ ____~d ¡ Ç;;~"mOHIDOHm)HfW;I!ò I~ I~ ¡ I, I "- .~. ¡ '1..._ ~ 1~ _. ::E 1 \~. _ CHIP SEAL I \f1£ , 'i'! i !,~w:u¡: ·~~t~-· JlIJIUJ1IWl1h: i:~:~>JJlIJlI i I~~ ,,,®l ! 11ft ~ : ~ !.. f I __J..._-.-_.__.l <- .. <- (!-IM,~ -. _ I'IIAl'6k£T.Ofw;&;' 1A- IT - - - - '" --.rJ @r'''· , '-~. .: "\:' 1:1" i.A~CAPt ~' fjr,lf'fERYANI LEGEND NOTES: T otBI of 6 oontr8C1.ors y&l'O$ wUI be provided onMe E.ach contTador yæñri contain (2)1300 S.F Noo-œmtlU6lJble ~I oobng$ T oIal iiU:feage: 20 AC 10taJ o.lImCter of gpaœs: 354 Norrber of spaces reQuited: 354- Ai &inósciIpØ INiI be dmOgtIt ttHeta1'ltlindigenous and na1iYé 10 conformlJOCewflt11hø TO'M'I of Mftn\08 gOOehne:!\. Existing zoning: C (Lalge lotZoMIgj Proposed zoning: H! {HighlindualiiaO Gön-1QOJ inwv01' 'l' como~ SuBding Þegh!:S not to ÐXceed: 24' , All roadways and par1dng amas U¡. be approved C~5fNl1. &I tat ySfd 8f9iIr. 10 be 5f8~ grawl Trash end050fM to be provsdel:i per Town 01 Matena 5\andef'Ö'S.. All signs on property ~Icon.form fX'I TOWI'! of Manma WlndEtrtts. Eßd'I CMtractor yard will CONain (.ì}separø1€ Iøas:atMeilÆtBS ", Scmflnjng rnå1erials wil1ncluóe both ef1ai11im feodng and deçorø\IYe waif;. . Retonbon/detention baR'l$ will tie used for water -bog r1\ i~r~1~IT~~ u TUCSON.^" 8570·"2<'023"'" - - BOUNDARY' F'"ENŒ: -..-..- POWERSllPPlY --CI-E SEPTIC -- eMU 'o'(",u !OObollC\'.·.'fDlI_r~'1 Á APPROXiMATE T lOCATIÜf\lOF VV8.l ADJACENT PARCElS ; ~""';W"f~..;;iId'ç¡c·a"'lI«, ~~~ a.<tog o 300 Feet Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 43 Land Use Plan D. Topography 1. TPD Response to Topographic Characteristics The existing grade is conducive to development. 2. Areas of Encroachment There are no areas on the project site with slopes of 15% or greater. 3. New Average Cross-Slope No allowances are to be made under Title 19. E. Hydrology 1. TDP Response to Hydrological Characteristics The existing hydrological characteristics of the site will be impacted by the proposed development by the paving of road and parking surfaces, which increases stormwater runoff, and by the construction of water harvesting basins to comply with detention/retention development requirements. Because the flooding depth is 2.0', as shown on the FEMA FIRM, all buildings will have to be elevated on piers or fill to at least one foot above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE), which is equivalent to three (3.0') above grade. Individual fences must be designed to pass sheet flows underneath. Grading shall be consistent with existing local topography to allow conveyance of regional flows through the project and to not obstruct the local off-site flows. Water harvesting basins should be located to maximize full capture of runoff from developed (impervious) areas. Because the proposed development consists of contractor's yards, much of the area will remain pervious. Water harvesting basins will be located within the pervious contractor's yards. The basins will be a combination of concrete and hand placed rip rap. Development of the site should not alter existing drainage patterns on-site and/or their relationship to off- site watersheds. After development, the site will continue to accept off- site runoff from the northeast and will continue to drain southwest towards the Santa Cruz River, as shown on Exhibit II.E: Post Development Hydrology. 2. Information and Substantiation for Encroachment / Modification of Drainage Patterns Since the entire parcel and surrounding areas are mapped within the FEMA 100- year floodplain, it is not possible to avoid encroachment Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 44 Land Use Plan into the 1 DO-year floodplain. The proposed development shown on the Concept Site Plan prepared by The Planning Center (presented here as Figure 3) will mitigate the impacts of increased discharge through water harvesting basins. To mitigate flow velocities and prevent downstream erosion, rock riprap aprons will be used to dissipate energy wherever concentrated flows are released. The 1 DO-year event flows will be conveyed over land and within the proposed roadways and parking lots as unconcentrated sheetflows, as under existing conditions. Detention of the 2-, 10-, and I DO-year events down to at least 10% below existing conditions is required for this development because the project site is located in a "critical-designated" basin. Development of the site will also require 5-year threshold retention of stormwater runoff because this is a commercial development larger than one acre in size. Locations for the proposed water harvesting basins need to be shown in natural (downstream) locations on the Conceptual Site Plan, prepared by The Planning Center, where they will collect the entire runoff from paved/developed sites into the pervious contractor's yards. Water harvesting basin outlets should be riprap lined to dissipate discharge energy and prevent downstream erosion. Required retention volume calculations are presented under item number 5 below. A complete drainage report will be completed during the development plan review process. 3. Potential Drainage Impacts to Off-site Land Uses Upstream and Downstream Pre- and post-development 1 DO-year peak discharges were calculated for the parcel, with and without the contributing off-site watersheds. Pre- and post-development discharges are summarized in Table 1 below: Watersbed OS) OS2 0S4 OS5 DA I E (Existing) DA2 E (Existing) DA3 E (Existing) DA4 E (Existing) DA5 E (Existing) DiI ¡ E WiOS ¡ (Existing) DA2E W/OS2 (Existing) DA4E WIOS4 (Existing) DA5E W/OS5 (Existing) DA 1 F (Future) DA2F (Future) DA4F (Future) DA4AF (Future) DA5F (Future) DAIFWIOSI (Future) DA2F W!OS2 (Future) DA4F \V!DA4AF&OS4 (Fumreì DA5F W/OS5 (Future) IahJ.ú Peak Runoff Values Aêres 0.30 47.88 37.61 419.62 0.84 3.07 3.06 10.75 ~.25 1.14 50.95 48.36 421.87 0.84 4.51 9.62 2.40 2.60 1.14 52.39 49.63 Ql00(cfs) 1.7 J78.8 155.3 859.3 4.8 17.5 J 7.4 58.5 12.8 6.5 1803 180.6 850.1 5A 33.2 71.7 18.3 19.2 7.2 195.3 2 J 3.4 ...__ 852.3 ~__ 422.22 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 45 I i ì , ! Land Use Plan 4. Engineering and Design Features to be Used to Address Drainage and Erosion Problems The proposed development should have no impacts to off-site land uses upstream or downstream of the proposed development. With the natural gentle land slopes, the required 5-year threshold retention, 2-, 10-, and 100-year detention requirements, water harvesting, and appropriate energy dissipation, development of this project should not cause any adverse impacts to the downstream undeveloped and light industrial areas, or the upstream vacant and developing residential lands. 5. Description of how the TOP conforms to area plans, basin management plans and town policies. Because the parcel lies within" an area of 2.0' deep regional sheet flooding, individual fences will be designed to pass sheet flows underneath, all buildings will be elevated to at least one foot above the BFE, and grading will be consistent with existing local topography, as shown in Figure 3. Although water harvesting basins will only discharge "bleeder" flows, outlets should be riprap-lined to dissipate discharge energy of regional flooding and prevent downstream erosion. The 5-yr threshold retention for the entire 19.97 -acre site has been computed using Equation 3.3 in the Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual as follows, based on preliminary lay-out: Vr = 1/12(Cwdev-Cwex)PsA = 0.649025 acre ft, or 28,271.53 ft3 {Equation 3.3} Where: Vr CWdev = CWex = Ps = A = = storage volume required; in acre-feet Runoff coef. for developed conditions = 0.57 (Table 3. 1) Runoff coef. for existing conditions = 0.31 vv(Table 3. 1) 1-hr, 5-yr rainfall, inches = 1.50 (Table 3. 1) Drainage area, acres = 19.97 Therefore, a total retention of 28,271.53 ft3 is required for this project. 6. TOP Conformance with Area Plan, Basin Management Plans and Town Policies By incorporating the proposed design features, flows discharged from off-site watersheds will continue to be accepted without impacting upstream properties and will be discharged without impacting downstream properties. Threshold retention of the 5-year event will also be implemented to fully comply with all applicable Pima County policies relating to flow control. Additionally, all buildings will be elevated to at least one foot above the BFE, all fences will be designed to pass sheet flows underneath, and grading will be consistent with Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 46 Land Use Plan existing local topography to allow conveyance of regional flows through the project, in accordance with FEMA regulations and Pima County flood control policies. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 47 Land Use Plan Exhibit II.E: Post Development Hydrology JJ OS2 0,00 178.8 CFS JOlt IIIIIIIr PUIPOIIIII OILY -----~-~---~-_.- NOTES. PROPERTY BOUNDARY DISClAIMER 'j; nus ORAYJlNQ IS FOR PRB.IMINARV PlANNING PURPOSES ~L V, AS S1" TED,.. THE TITLE BlOQ<, AND IS THEREFORE NOT PROFESSIONAU Y STAMPED OR SIGNED. THE LAYOUT OF STREETS. PAALS. BUlLOrN'GS. AND THE DRAlNÃGE SOtEME. GAADES AND B.EVATIONS ARE CURSORY, BASED ON THE "TYPICAl' MODULE PRO\IDED BV THE PLANNING CENTER. WHICH WAS SNPl V MULTtPllED EIGHT (8) TNES AND ARRANGED TO FLL THE ENilRE PROJECT ÞÆA DISCLAIMER 112: GREG CARLSON ENGINEERlJr,K;,llC ASSUtÆS NO RESPONSlJltfTV OR tlABllITY, ~ERENT OAlWuED, FORAN'" FUTURE USE OF THts PRELtMilNA.RY DRAwtNG. AU. FEATiJRES SI-tOYm WERE PROVIDED BY THE OWNER ANO ARE FOR PRElMNAAY PURPOSES OM. Y, (AS REQUESTED BY THE PlÂHNlNG CENTER). THIS DRAWING IS NOT MENDED FOR DES)GN PURPOSES. SlBST AHTIAl REFINEMENTS AND UOOlFtCATK)NS WOUlD BE NECESSARY TO REMJER THIS DRAWING IJ$EMlE FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES -..NV'- FLOW LINE WATERSHED BOUNDARY DtsClAlUERJ3- GREG CARt...S()III ENGINEE~NG.llC CAN PREpARE AND PROVIDE A FNALlZED VERSION fOR CQf(STRUC'TtON PURPOSES. STAMPED AND SIGNED 8V ^ PROFESstONN. ENGINEER REGISTERED IN ARIZONA. IF AND WHEN so REOUESTEDICONTRACTED ~ \ ~y /'  GÆG CI\II..SOH ENGIt£E1IHG. II C ~::;:;=: Œ)œTl-E aD PlANNING ~~.i~;~~ ~""""-"""""-- Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 48 Land Use Plan F. VEGETATION An inventory of the native plants on the property was performed on August 15, 2001. An inventory summary, calculation of mitigation trees, and summary of the total plants included in the landscape area upon project completion have been included in a Native Plan Preservation Ordinance submittal dated October 2001. The applicant provided the number of salvageable trees removed from the site prior to the inventory. The original locations of trees and landscape area where the trees were transplanted or remain are depicted on a 1" = 1 00' aerial photograph of the property within this report. The Town of Marana has conditionally approved the Native Plant Permit application for this project with three conditions. The first condition specifies that the seventy-two plants previously removed from the site will be replaced with a 1: 1 ratio of 24" box plants. The second condition is the increase of the perimeter bufferyard and the timely transplant of plants into it. The landscaped area will will be increased to the full extent of the East and South property line. The third condition requires the stabilization of disturbed soil to reduce the airborne particulate matter. Response to Native Plant Ordinance, Title 20: See Above. Landscape Buffer plant requirements were determined by a comparison of zone and/or exisiting land use. The following landscape buffers will be utilized onsite as specified by the Town of Marana Land Development Code. East- 30' landscape buffer onsite / (HI to C) South- 13' landscape buffer onsite / (HI to C) West- 10' landscape buffer onsite / (HI to C) & 10' landscape buffer onsite / (HI to HI) North- 50' landscape buffer onsite / (HI to HI) (see attached PDP for graphical representation) G. WILDLIFE 1. Habitat Disturbance Mitigation and Continuity: No significant habitat exists onsite. Habitat for the pygmy-owl no longer exists on the property site due to the NNPO of October 2001, where it was approved for the site to be graded. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 49 Land Use Plan Heavy Industrial ¡ -_._-~_._.- - Heavy Industrial Commercial '\lLMi".J8Uof'I:: IU,."t:fI!V"~ Commercial - _..._.~--~".. Legend: - - Project Site Landscape Bulferyard Exhibit II.F.1: Vegetation Buffer Heavy Industrial WlAk!):'.'¡I';AI'f trtJI:r~ARP -- ---~ (--- ~ t f ,: i Ii I I ' t ¡! I I I I I I I I I L _ .._ _ _ .~- H- ){I1,Ii!\;'r"$;::AW : I IItJöJ"t'.RYA>eJ , , I , , I I I I -J Commercial 13' ;,A1tßÇA,1'( '" ."'F,.,.....VARP _..,- -,-- Buena Vista Street Commercial Commercial o C)æTHE 300 Feet PLANNING CENTER ~·1'~'r.:tiuR:-j-i^VF. SU;T,,-ß.'Ú':" !~!Q!L~,,~Çl!52IJJW~~ - Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 50 Land Use Plan H. VIEWSHEDS 1. Offsite Views and Vistas: Views and vistas of properties surrounding the project site will be minimally impacted. Properties to the northwest of the project site will experience no impact to their views and vistas. Properties south and southwest will have a minimal impact on their views of the distant Tortolita Mountain Range. There will be no impact to viewsheds experienced by properties southeast of the project site. Western adjacent properties distant viewsheds of the Santa Catalina Mountain Range will be slightly impacted depending on building pad(s) placement. The most significant impact will be experienced by adjacent properties northeast and east of the site. Immediate viewsheds of 1-10 and the Tucson Mountain Range will be impacted. Here, base views of this viewshed may be cut off. 2. Areas of High Visibility: The areas of high visibility occur along the northern edge of the project site adjacent to Hayden Concrete as well as the southwestern portion of the project site near the R & R Storage Facility yards. I. TRAFFIC 1. Access Points: Access points for this project are shown on the preliminary development plan. Access to the contractor yard facilities will be provided via an easement extending eastward off the Breakers Road easement which will be chip-sealed. This easement travels along the northern border of parcel 216-08-012B (Widger Park N' Shade) and intersects the project site at its northwestern corner. From here, a 29.5' chip-sealed access road will extend south along the western project border to the midpoint of parcel 216-08-013B, thus providing access to both the northern and southern four contractors yards. It may be dedicated to the Town of Marana depending on the actual traffic volumes generated. 2. Off-site Road Improvements: No off-site road improvements are proposed at this time. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 51 Land Use Plan 3. ADT Projections: The following ADT's are estimated for this project according to the ITE Trip Generation Manual (th Edition): Contractor's Yards - (Warehousing Category) = 4.96 trips/1 ,000 gross square feet of building area, weekday 3600 square feet of building area per yard = (4.96 trips x 3.6 square feet x 8 yards) = 143 total trips per day for the entire project site. 4. Impact on Local Streets: The impact on existing local streets (Breakers Road easement) will be minimal. 5. Bicycle and Pedestrian Pathways: There are no bicycle or pedestrian ways on Tangerine Road or Breakers Road. Due to the proposed use, no pedestrian or bicycle pathways are proposed. 6. On-Site Rights-of Way: On-site rights-of-way consist of the 29.5' access easement extending from the northwestern corner of the project site southwards to the midpoint of parcel 216-08-013B. This access easement will be chip- sealed in order to provide all-weather access to the site. Further, both parcels will contain a 30' chip-sealed right-of-way to provide access to each of the 8 proposed contractors yards. All access rights-of-way will be designed to Town of Marana standards and privately maintained. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 52 Land Use Plan J. PUBLIC UTILITIES 1. Sewer: Currently, there is no public sanitary sewer to service this development. The project will utilize septic systems on-site. A capacity response letter from the Pima County Wastewater Management Department has been included in this report (See Exhibit II.J.1: Wastewater Letter). The use of the septic system will not occur until the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality approves it. 2. Water The project site lies within the Town of Marana Water Department District. At this time, the Town has no facilities in this location. Town staff are currently determining the best reasonable cost method for provision of water in the area (See Exhibit II.J.2: Water Service Letter). Onsite water storage will be provided via onsite wells and storage tanks. 3. Gas: N/ A - there will be no use of natual gas onsite 4. Electric: Trico Electric Company currently serves this area. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 53 Land Use Plan Exhibit II.J.1: Wastewater Letter , .' PI:;; f~Y' . ..., I., .ü.r\~ .~~ ~~(~ ... " ·ltlio~t- KATHLEEN M. CHAVEZ, P.E. DiRECTOR PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 201 NORTH STONE AliEr,UE rUCSON. ARiZONA 85701.1207 Lp' j ·)E! :;>(".., PH. (520) 740-6500 FAX 1520) 620-0135 ~ji_:tnidn) C - 1 0 :~.~:,...' "1¡ '--,L :.:. 1;,' ( ." I1.Jc:·or, t..e;' t CAPACITY RESPONSE NO. 03-27 ¡T.,_,;\.; _ ~ \'1- ~ì~ " '" l-'GC1'S 'J.,:...:/:.CC::: 1 ( 2.l r~~_ C f',- - í: ;:-(~?c'ni!;"Ç. .1"..... pa r'ceJ :~r(~.:; }(;;:: t....;:; ·-'O~;c.Jul::-sL .r',::q:~rdj il~r (?16 'C8-(JIJB) dnd LÌ12 EJ'èèlL ~n t E:)'3 dnÖ nC':t. Lr: :'; \?:1 -'_ :. ~ '1 i l-( "!J. c'"' ;'~: ,j' f,::¡(:Tit i ~~ ::.' L ~"'t -~. .- Ub ~ ,1ev(:;lcprnü":;tD ,;~ 'ld Î~{-:(' Lïn:...'., '2~~::.:neLt:s) I t_1H~'(, ct-1)ç :":'1. "y ~)1.- S ,~.::. ]~i J, ce, ~. ~~lch (~:L a,E!C ~_11n D. '.~ , ~ r r:;- }''':C c v·'·" ,> L te Str:;:c·c. " '11 \~: ~l ). \';·;.t¡: f:::',:,,' L ~~j~' ~"il9 ,-,~ ._v (), 11e'_':;. ry t \ .L'~ --ids: c· rlLj!-c~1 ~ ~x~'r¡G ..._1 d.') 1 j,-~jL ,. 11 'rff\ ~(F;::: '_':" ;--] ~.' .1 ....'. .:~'- uj.-c,,-::~d_ ,-...:U! 'ì' Sl:Jll":! ,3(';,' ~ l,J ~) r, nlJ 1:::"; : -j::..!:~ l' ~ ('. ?:'.~n(; ¡: i 0.'; r-(:--,1 y ,~.: J. ; ~ ;; I. .., " ,.- ,.. ~ C' J' f "';_C:..[i2,'h1?c: L'Jg~-l?~·) ;_I~'j ~(; "'~::'(::::;<,"l~::. j . '- :'i."r:" ~r, -: i-,"_' l,:g >H::;¡ . ' ',-' ','I Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 54 Land Use Plan Exhibit II.J.2: Water Letter I-,--/~~ MA'RANA "~~/ ¡ "- ~~"'/ i '\.. TOWN OF MARANA WATER DEPARTMENT May 2. 2(1)3 Ted Helman The Planning Center 110 South Church Street Suite 1260 Tucson. /\nzona 85701 Re: Rezoning of20+ acres. Breakers Road south of Tangerine Road Dear Mr. Herman: In reply 10 your Jetter dated April 16,2003, the Town has no water service in that area a1 ¡his tÍme. We are conducting a study to determine the best alternative tor water service. The study should be complete in about a year. Sincerely, /~~~~ ~-- C. Brad DeSpain Uti1ities Director 51011 IV INA 1m TUCSON. AZ 8574:'-9746: Phone (520) 545·1264 !'ax (520) 545·1266 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 55 Land Use Plan K. PUBLIC SERVICE IMPACTS 1. Police: Police service will be provided by the Marana Police Department. The nearest police substation is located approximately 4.5 miles southeast from the project site at 13291 N. Lon Adams Road. 2. Fire: The project site will be annexed into the Northwest Fire District. Station 37, 13001 N. Tortolita Road, will provide service to this site. 3. Sanitary Pick-up Service: Waste Management will provide trash pick-up for the site on a subscription basis. 4. Schools: N/ A - There will be no impact from the proposed development on schools. 5. Parks: N/A - There will be no impact from the development on parks. L. RECREATION AND TRAILS 1. Recreation Areas Provided: No recreational areas will be provided within the proposed devleopment. 2. Ownership of Open Space: No open space areas are proposed onsite. 3. Access to Offsite Public Trails: N/A - There are no offsite trails that adjacent or located within the project site. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 56 Land Use Plan M. CULTURAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES 1. Protection of Existing Resources: Dr. David Stephen of P.A.S.T. (Professional Archaeological Services of Tucson) conducted a 1 person-day, survey of the Widger/Cutler property on July 4, 2003. Based on the archival information, field methods, the observable surface indications and because none of the materials observed on the subject property have potential to provide important archaeological or historical information beyond what was obtained for this project, P.A.S.T. supports approving the rezoning application. (See Exhibit II.M.1: P.A.S.T. Abstract & Project Summary Form) 2. Incorporation of Resources into the Development N/A 3. Measures to Protect/Recover Archaeological/Historic Resources If human or cultural remains are found during the course of development, work will stop immediately, and the Arizona State Museum will be notified. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 57 Land Use Plan Exhibit II.M.1: P.A.S.T. Abstract & Summary Form P.A.S.T. ABSTRACT & PROJECT SUMMARY FORM PAS.T. JOB NO, 031563 OVERVIEW. An on-tool cultural resaurces survey of private property (20 acres) in anticipation of iond development near Marano in Pima County identified no cultural resources and 0 isolated artifact[sj. P I h h· bl d N 'd f rt'f t b k d t I I , arce I as been mac Ine a eo. o eVI ence 0 a I ac s In ac " or a ana parce maralns. INTRODUCTION (D1) j Cultural Resources Survey Of The Widqer/Cutler Project Near Marano, Pima County, AZ. , ID2) 7/8/2003 ID31 Aqency Name: ID4) ASM Permit No. 2003-35BL Other Permits: I NA IDS) Project Description: The land is slated for commercial development. (D61 Aqency Reterence: Proiect Sponsor: Cutler Investments, LLC (Dl) PROJECT lOCATION INFORMATION (see 0;50 attached copy of USGS mapl County: I Pima Vicinity of I Marano I AZ Legal: Within the the E2 of the SE of the NE4 Section 5 Tl2S R12E G&SRB&M AZ QUAD I USGS MAP NAME I MAP SCALE 1. AA:12NW I Marana I 7.5' /081 SURVEY INFORMATION Type: I Non-collection on-foot survey with systematic 20m transects or equal I Person-days I 1 20 acres AND/OR 0 miles long BY 0 foot wide riqht-of-way I Percent surveyed 100% Land Ownership I private Field Crew I T. Wyman I Proiect Director: I David Stephen Field Work Dates I Juiz. 4,2003 I Ground visibility was effected I minima~ Additional Survey Records Submitted: I None I Artifact Collections Submitted to ASM: I None 109·10) CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN PROJECT AREA (see report narrative tor additlano! intormotian) ----- Archives Researched: ¡ ASM f2;] I AZSITE 0 I SHPO 0 T GLO 0 I MNA 0 I Other: Numbers of eligible sites NA Numbers of ineliqible sites NA Previously recorded sites NA New sites found this project NA Artifact scatters NONE Total sites NONE Sites within 100 meters NONE Isolate density/total artifacts o per acre 10 Sites in 1.6 km radius 82,158,159,160,161,197,247,249,257,260,261 ,422423.424,344,674,722.723 & 724 Ref. No, Of Prior Surveys ASM-1990& 1981-174 IDlt) RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK (see also comments below) FURTHER WORK RECOMMENDED NONE ~ OR SITE RECORDING 0 I MONITORING 0 SUB-SURFACE TESTING 0 I DATA RECOVERY 0 COMMENTS ~see report narrative additional intormction,l The quantit\' of artifacts within the subject property and data about known sites suggests the undertaking will impact no cultural resources. Based on the field work and archival documentation, the project sponsor should be allowed to develop the subject property without further cultural resource studies. References (see also last pege of report) I Form Completed By : David Stephen Form Rev. ¡ 102 I Date i 7/8/2003 Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 58 Land Use Plan Bibliography Town of Marana Rezone Proceduaral Guide and Application, March 1997. Marana Land Development Code: Title 5- Zoning, revised July 2003. Title 10- Procedure, revised January 1997. Title 19- Standards for Grading and Related Site Work, revised January 1997. Title 20- Protection of Native Plants, revised April 2003. Eastern Pima County Trail System Master Plan Town of Marana Trail System Master Plan, 2002. Aerial Photographs- Landiscor 2001 Imagery Zoning Map(s)- Pima County G.I.S. **Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, Pima County Department of Transportation and Flood Control District. USGS Topographic Map, Jaynes Quadrangle. Pima County Mapguide Map. Landscaping & Contractors Yards Tangerine Rezoning 59 Appendix A: Cultural Resources Survey {..I Ie - 0...::L ~¡ío~3 CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY OF THE WIDGER/CUTLER PROJECT NEAR MARANA, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA Submitted to: Cutler Investments, LLC 6913 N. Camino Martin Tucson, AZ 85742 Submitted by Professiona I Archaeological Services of Tucson 5036 Golder Ranch Rd. Tucson, AZ 85739-4265 Prepared by David V.M. Stephen Ph.D. Principal Investigator State Antiquities Permit No. 2003-35BL P.A.S.T. Cultural Resources Report No. 031563 7/8/2003 11 P.A.S.T. ABSTRACT & PROJECT SUMMARY FORM P.A.S.T. JOB NO. 031563 OVERVIEW. An on-foot cultural resources survey of private property (20 acres) in anticipation of land development near Marano in Pima County identified no cultural resources and 0 isolated artifact(s). Parcel has been machine bladed. No evidence of artifacts in back dirt or alon arcel mar ins. (D2) 7/8/2003 2003-35BL NA The land is slated for commercial develo ment. AZ 7.5' Réf.NO.ØfHftor Surve (Dl1) RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK (see also comments below) NONE ¡:g OR SITE RECORDING D MONITORING D SUB-SURFACE TESTING D DATA RECOVERY D COMMENTS (see report narrative additional information) The quantity of artifacts within the subject property and data about known sites suggests the undertaking will impact no cultural resources. Based on the field work and archival documentation, the project sponsor should be allowed to develop the subject property without further cultural resource studies. RéferenCeS(seealso last page FormCornlètedB David Stephen Form Rev. 1/02 7/8/2003 Widger/Cutler, Page 1 Cultural Resources Survey Of The Widger/Cutler Project Near Marano, Pima County, Arizona PAST No. 031563 Introduction. Personnel from P.A.S.T. conducted a 1 person-day, survey of the Widger/Cutler property on July 4, 2003 located in Pima County near Marana in anticipation of commercial development. The purpose of the project was to determine whether any significant cultural resources that might be adversely impacted by construction were present. The project sponsor [Cutler Investments, LLC) initiated this study in accordance with municipal requirements. P.A.S.T. holds permit 2003-35BL issued under the Arizona Antiquities Act through the Arizona State Museum. Project Location and Ownership. The approximately 20 acre project area is located in the north western portion of the Tucson Basin [Figure 1). The project area is located on the Marana United States Geological Survey 7.5' map. The location with respect to the Public Land Survey is within the the E2 of the SE of the NE4 of section 5 Tl2S R12E G&SRB&M. The UTM values for selected boundary points are shown on the map to provide the dimensions of the parcel. The boundary shown on the map is reasonably accurate given the limitations of a 1 :24,000 scale map. It is based on data and maps provided by the client as well as field observations but it is not intended to represent the precise legal extent of the parcel. Unless otherwise noted, land ownership coincides with the parcel and survey boundary shown in Figure 1. The fieldwork was conducted on private lands. Base Maps Included In Report Figure 1 is a copy of a portion of the U.S.G.S. Marana 7.5-minute topographic map that shows the project boundaries, archaeological sites within the project area, and all isolated artifacts and features found during the survey. Projects extending across multiple maps are so noted on page ii and in the lower left of Figure 1. BACKGROUND TO STUDY AREA: Effective Environment. The study area is within the Basin and Range physiographic province at an approximate elevation of 2,120 feet. Project area vegetation is typical of the Arizona Upland subdivision of the Sonoran Desertscrub biotic province [Turner and Brown 1982) predominately comprised of annual grasses and mesquite. Records Review. A review of the records of the Arizona State Museum (ASM), in anticipation of the survey revealed that the subject parcel had not undergone a complete archaeological surveyor sufficient time has passed since an earlier study suggesting heretofore undiscovered cultural resources may have been subsequently exposed that would not have been documented by the initial field work. The ASM records, as well as the other P.A.S.T. Tucson, Arizona USA 520. 825.3536 Widger/Cutler, Page 2 archives indicated on the associated project form, revealed no recorded cultural resources on the inspected parcel. Previously recorded cultural resources within a 100 meter perimeter around the project boundary are noted since such resources may account for the presence of isolated non-site cultural entities found on the parcel. Recorded cultural resources within a 1.6 kilometer radius of the center of the project area are listed on the project summary form and in Table A-2. Culture History. The antiquity laws apply to human cultural remains in excess of 50 years of age and require them to be assessed as to their potential for yielding important information. Consequently, sites and artifacts dating from the mid twentieth century and earlier must be evaluated. The historical period that commenced in roughly 1700 is comprised of the Spanish, Mexican and Anglo occupations with some researchers recognizing the protohistoric as a transitional culture from the earlier prehistoric occupations. The prehistoric peoples who lived in this region include the Hohokam, Archaic and Paleoindian cultures. The Hohokam (A.D. 450 - 1450¡. The Hohokam were a sedentary, agriculture-based people who produced both plain and decorated pottery, along with numerous other crafts of shell, stone and clay. They were skillful agriculturists who lived in houses built in shallow pits and constructed extensive irrigation canal systems. In some of the larger villages, they built ballcourts that probably served as focal points for ceremonial or recreational activities. Whether the Hohokam migrated into the region from Mexico or developed from indigenous Archaic populations is still hotly debated. The Hohokam cultural sequence was established in the 1930s based on the decorated pottery types unearthed at the Snaketown Site in the Phoenix Basin. Shortly thereafter, Isabel Kelly modified this chronology to fit the Tucson Basin sequence after her excavations at the Hodges Ruin in Tucson. Since that time, the continual acquisition of new archaeological data has brought about many refinements in the chronology. Archaic Era (7500 B.C. - A.D. 450!, The Archaic era has traditionally been characterized by assemblages of chipped stone artifacts along with ground stone tools for processing plant materials, and a lack of ceramics. Recent research in the Tucson Basin and elsewhere has demonstrated the presence of pit house villages, agriculture and some ceramics in the Late Archaic. The shift from a hunting-based economy to a reliance on plant foraging and small-game hunting that characterized the Archaic sites was caused by the extinction of Pleistocene mammals favored by the Paleoindians. Paleo-Indian Era (ca. 10,000 - 7500 B.C.!. Eleven thousand years ago, the climate in the Southwestern United States was considerably wetter and cooler than it is today, and much of the terrain consisted of lush grasslands that supported herds of mammoth, bison and other large grazing animals. Many of the earliest occupants of the area, known as Paleoindians, were hunters who subsisted on these large, late Pleistocene mammals. The belief that many of the Paleoindians were primarily big-game hunters is supported by the fact that most of the Paleo-Indian sites that have been excavated have been kill and butchering sites. The artifact assemblages from these sites are made up of projectile points and other stone tools suitable for skinning animals and cutting meat and bone. The earliest Paleo-Indian artifacts found in southern Arizona P.A.S.T, Tucson, Arizona USA 520. 825.3536 Widger/Cutler, Page 3 belong to the Clovis complex (9500-9000 B.C.), which is characterized by long, lanceolate, fluted Clovis points, along with other stone implements and bone artifacts. Survey Expectations. This project's study area was located in a portion of southern Arizona that is conducive to prehistoric and/or historical settlement. Therefore, it was considered a reasonable likelihood that prehistoric or historical sites would be found during the survey. CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY: Methods. The field work consisted of an intensive on-foot coverage of the property by our staff in order to identify and locate any cultural resources, historic or prehistoric, within the property boundaries. Field personnel (T. Wyman) were spaced approximately 20 meters apart and crossed the subject property in a series of contiguous corridors with any areas of extreme slope covered less intensively. Survey transects paralleled the longest dimension of the property except when prevented by the landform, vegetation density or hydrological features. Unless noted otherwise, the transect count is the quotient of the transect extent and parcel width. General conditions were excellent for conducting the fieldwork. Ground visibility was minimally effected by the presence of trees, shrubs, semi-shrubs, succulents and grasses. The original land-form was severely disturbed by modern alterations to the ground surface. Survey Results. The information derived from the field work is generally in keeping with the expectations generated from archival and literature sources. There were no surface indications of archaeological resources on the property which meet the Arizona State Museum minimum standard for recording as an archaeological site or that would be eligible for inclusion in the National Register ofH istoric Places. A total of 0 isolated artifacts or non- site features were noted (see Table A-l). As relevant, discussions of non-site resources are presented below. More recent cultural manifestations identified during the survey include dirt tracks and medium density scatter of trash. All appear to be modern in origin. Evaluation of Cultural Resources. Although archaeological and historical sites may qualify for formal recording under state standards, they generally are not considered significant unless they are eligible for listing in the Arizona or National Register of Historic Places. According to the current standards a property must possess sufficient integrity, significance and antiquity to be listed in the Register. In addition to being at least 50 years of age a resource must meet the criteria set forth below: The quality of significance in American or Arizona history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: A) that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B) that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or P.A.S.T. Tucson, Arizona USA 520. 825.3536 Widger/Cutler, Page 4 C) that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or 0) that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history (National Park Service 1986) Eligibility Evaluation. No cultural resources were located during the course of the field work in the project area appear to be more than 50 years old. Consequently it is not germane to assess significance under any of the criteria listed above. Evaluation Of Effects Of The Proposed Project. Considering the cultural resources found on the property, the development of the inspected parcel will not have an effect on potentially significant cultural resources. Recommend ations. Based on the archival information, field methods, the observable surface indications and because none of the materials observed on the subject property have potential to provide important archaeological or historical information beyond what was obtained for this project, P.A.S.T. supports approving the sponsor's application. Although P.A.S.T. does not endorse additional archaeological studies for this project, ground disturbing activities on the property should not commence without authorization by the agency archaeologist(s) . There remains the possibility that ground disturbing activities could reveal the presence of heretofore undiscovered cultural resources. If such materials are discovered construction activities should stop. Consultation should be initiated with the cognizant agency archaeologist, and if applicable under ARS §41-841 et seq. the Arizona State Museum, to assess the potential significance of any materials unearthed. Under State law (ARS 41-§865 & §41-844) if human skeletal remains or funerary objects are discovered on either public or private lands the Arizona State Museum should be contacted immediately. NOTE FOR ADOT INVOLVED PROJECTS: If previously unidentified cultural resources are encountered during activity related to the use of this source, the contractor shall stop work immediately at that location and shall take all reasonable steps to secure the preservation of those resources. The Engineer will contact the ADOT Environmental Planning Group, Historic Preservation Team at 602.712.8641 and make arrangements for the proper treatment of those resources, LITERATURE CITED Notional Pork Service 1986 Guidelines for Completing National Register of Historic Places Forms. Department of the Interior. Copies available from Bulletin No. 16. National Register of Historic Places. Turner, R. and D. Brown 1982 Sonoran Desertscrub. In Biotic Communities of the American Southwest - United States and Mexico, edited by D. Brown, pp. 118-121. University of Arizona for Boyce Thompson Southwestern Arboretum, Superior, Arizona. P.A.S.T. Tucson, Arizona USA 520. 825.3536 Widger/Cutler, Page 5 REPORT TABLES Table A-1. Isolates Provenience (all UTM Zone 12) Total isolated artifacts: 0 I Isolates per acre: 0 I GPS Datum: NAD27 ø WGS84 0 ISO # Eastinq Northing Kind Comments a b c d e f 9 h i j k I m (Individual Artltacts: PW = PLAINWARE: DW = DECORATED; CS = CHIPPED STONE; GS = Ground STONE; FR = FAR; SH = SHEll; OR = OTHER) (Non-site entities: NSS" non-site artifact scatter; NSF = non-site teature Table A-2. Table of Recorded Sites Within 1.6 km Radius (all G&SRB&M) ASM Quad AA:12 Site Numbers 82,158,159,160,161,197,247,249,257.260,261 .422423.424,344,674,722,723 & 724 Table A-3. Site Management Summary Table (all G&SRB&M) only reguired when areater than 3 sites are located) ASM# Status T/R/Section Owner- Content Eligible? Additional Work ship or Age Recommended P.A.S.T. Tucson, Arizona USA 520. 825.3536 .Yidger/Cutler, Page 6 Fig. 1 U.S.G.S. 7.5' MAP Marana (AA:12 NW) 1563 1927 North Ametican Datum; 1.000........ UTI< grid zone 12 Gencrfltcdb¥ BigT opc [1/NIIW.igege.com 0 Map carnpied horn USGS Quads: MlII'ðnð ·;ÞZ AuelðI ClI~on .:þzl-------i o 1---1 t- " w 1000 ~ 2000 3000 1Mic , 5Cro Feet . P.A.S.T. '663JT3' o ~ 0.5 1----1 ¡....--. , Kilometel PAST No. 031563 Sec. 5 T12S R12E G&SRB&M July, 03 NOTE: Due to the sensitivity of site locations, only sites within the project area are depicted on the map Site locations as well as their geometric representation and extent are approximate. Nt TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: December 7, 2004 AGENDA ITEM: IX. B. 3 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: James R. DeGrood, P.E. Executive Asst. to Town Manager SUBJECT Presentation: Development Impact Fees for Townwide Parks and Northwest Marana Roadways DISCUSSION On September 30, 2004 the Town of Marana released an Impact Fee Report recommending the adoption a new impact fees for park development and for arterial and collector roadways in Northwest Marana. The fees recommended are $3,095 per dwelling unit (townwide) for new park development, and $6,315 per dwelling unit for roadway development in Northwest Marana. Copies of the Impact Fee Report have been available at Town Hall, and have been distributed to developers and builders working within the Town. Presentations on the new fee proposal were made at a developers' roundtable October 6th and at the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association (SAHBA) Technical Committee on October 19th. A Public Hearing was held on December 7, 2004 on the proposed impact fees. Comments have been received from four organizations, including a Peer Review of the Development Impact Fee Study performed by EPS Consultants on behalf of the Southern Arizona Homebuilders Association. The following changes were made in response to the concerns and questions raised: · Adjustments were made to the Transportation Impact Fee to account for non - residential land uses and their impact on the cost of interchanges in the area. This follows Scenario 3 from the EPS report. · Expanded credit policy information was incorporated into the report. A new appendix to discuss treatment of CFDs, IDs, the establishment of Advance Impact Fee Payment Accounts, and reimbursement policies was added. · The Park section was revised to expand the list of creditable activities to include public trails and linear parks. · The information on Park deficiencies was revised to include newly accepted parks as well as funded, imminent parks. This reduced the existing deficiency in parks. · The Park section was revised to include the newly acquired (from Pima County, by trade) park property in the park land inventory. · The Park section was revised to eliminate the need to Bond to correct the park deficiency. Rather, an across the board credit was granted to new housing, in an amount equal to the cost per household to correct the existing deficiency. · Mandatory review of the Impact Fees was modified to allow for periodic revision to the fees rather than automatic, annual fee revision. ATTACHMENT Slide presentation (notes format only). STAFF COMMENTS Staff believes that the revisions made in the Impact Fee Report are appropriate responses to the concerns and questions raised by those commenting on the document. Comments requesting phased implementation of fees and reductions in level of service standards have been considered, but are not proposed for incorporation in the Impact Fee Report. Staff believes that this report has been appropriately modified, and the process for credit determination allows for appropriate consideration of developer contributions, as well as an avenue of appeal should a developer feel credits are not adequate. -2- Development Impact FeeStlldy NOrlhw..ll\-lar.naRo.dw.)·, !'arlt, Taw. arM..... C.rlh Luttk& Auoo:ial" Impact Fee Progress · Released Report September 30,2004 · Held Stakeholder Meeting October 6, 2004 · Presented to SAHBA Tech Committee on October 19, 2004 · Held Public Hearing December 7,2004 - Recommended to delay adoption until after February 1, 2005 Revisions Made · Adjusted Transportation Fee to account for non-residential impact on interchange costs. · Expanded on Credit Policies and created new Appendix E. · Expanded Creditable Park Improvements - Added to inventory of existing parks - Eliminated Bonding to address park deficiency Impact Fee Process · Prepare report, release it for 60 day review · Conduct Public Hearing · Adoption at least 14 days after Hearing · Collection begins 90 days after Adoption. Issues Raised · Level of Service Standards too high? · Questions about credit process. - Reimbursements - How calculated · Peer Review - Concern that non-residential should participate in road fee - Different method of calculating Park credit Fee Revision · Northwest Marana Road Fee - Was $6,315 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit - Now $5,941 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit · Parks Fee - Was $3,095 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit - Now $2,884 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit 1 '~~)r~~ ._'):! 2 TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: AprilS, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. B. 4 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: James R. DeGrood, P.E. Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 2005.11: Relating to Development; identifying the Marana Park Benefit Area, accepting and approving the technical report identifying park needs within that area, adopting park development impact fees for that area, and providing an effective date. DISCUSSION On September 30, 2004, the Town of Marana released an Impact Fee Report recommending the adoption a new impact fees for park development and for arterial and collector roadways in Northwest Marana. The analysis recommended a new impact fee in the amount of $3,095 per dwelling unit for new park development. Copies of the Impact Fee Report have been available at Town Hall, and have been distributed to developers and builders working within the Town. Presentations on the new fee proposal were made at a developers' roundtable October 6, 2004 and at the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association (SAHBA) Technical Committee on October 19,2004. Comments have been received from four organizations, including a request from SAHBA for an extended review period due to the complexity of the impact fee report and the time constraints associated with the end of year and holiday season. A public hearing on the proposed impact fee was held on December 7, 2004. There were no speakers on this matter, however staff recommended that the adoption of the new impact fees be delayed until after February 1, 2005 in order to allow for full comment and review by SAHBA. SAHBA subsequently engaged EPS, a highly regarded public finance and impact fee consultant from Sacramento to perform a peer review of the Impact Fee Report. The analysis was presented to the Town for comment and consideration on February 14th. The Town's study showed a deficiency in the developed park areas needed for the existing Marana population. It was further suggested that the Town would bond to construct improvements to meet the deficiency, and provide credit associated with the bond repayment. The EPS analysis suggested that greater credit would be due to new development associated with the bonding for deficient park improvements, and that the appropriate fee amount would be $2,794, rather than the $3,095 proposed. Staff reviewed these comments and proposes to 1) broaden the definition of parks to include linear parks and other specialty parks, 2) include the land recently obtained for parks through trade with Pima County, and 3) drop the proposal to satisfy the deficiency through bonding. In doing the above, the Town's park deficiency is reduced to 33 acres, and a credit based upon the proportionate cost of developing the deficient facilities. A revised Development Impact Fee for Parks in the amount of $2,884 per new residential dwelling unit is now proposed. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the adoption of an impact fee for the Marana Parks in the amount of $2,884 per equivalent dwelling unit. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2005.11. -2- MARANA ORDINANCE NO. 2005.11 RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT; IDENTIFYING THE MARANA PARK BENEFIT AREA, ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE TECHNICAL REPORT IDENTIFYING THE PARKS NEEDS WITHIN THAT AREA, ADOPTING PARK DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR THAT AREA, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Town is authorized by A.R.S. § 9-463.05 to assess and collect development impact fees to offset costs to the Town associated with providing necessary public services to a development; and WHEREAS, the technical report entitled ""Development Impact Fee Study; Northwest Marana Roadways, Parks" ("the Technical Report") identifies the Town limits of the Town of Marana as the Park Benefit Area and determines the fair-share park development impact fees attributable to the typical single-family residence, which shall be used as the equivalent demand unit ("EDU"), within the area; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report determines the Town's reasonably anticipated costs for providing park facilities to serve the expanding population; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report adequately considers the contributions made or to be made in the future by property owners within the Town toward or for the construction of public parks; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report contains all documentation that supports the assessment of the Marana Park Development Impact Fee; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report was released to the public and at least thirty days' advance notice of intention to assess the Park Impact Fee was given, and a public hearing was held on the proposed fee, all in accordance with A.R.S. § 9-463.05. NOW, THEREFORE, THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, do hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The Marana Park Benefit Area, consisting of all lands lying within the limits of the Town of Marana, is hereby established. SECTION 2. The Park Development Impact Fee is hereby adopted in the amount of $2,884 per EDD. SECTION 3. Town Staff shall collect the Park Development Impact Fee upon issuance of building permits for each residential development within the Town of Marana. SECTION 4. When calculating the amount of the Park Development Impact Fee to be collected for a given residential development, Town Staff shall determine the development's anticipated impact in comparison to the typical single-family residence, using the methods and equivalencies set forth in the Technical Report. SECTION 5. When assessing the Park Development Impact Fee, Town Staff shall give credit for the required dedication of public sites and improvements provided by the property owner for public park improvements, as provided by law. SECTION 6. All Park Development Impact Fees collected by the Town shall be held and disbursed in accordance with the requirements of A.R.S. § 9-463.05. SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall be effective ninety days after its formal adoption by the Mayor and Council ofthe Town of Marana. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Marana, Arizona, this 5th day of April, 2005. Bobby Sutton, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney 2 TOWN COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION TOWN OF MARANA MEETING DATE: AprilS, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX.B.5 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: James R. DeGrood, P.E., Assistant Town Manager SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 2005.12: Relating to Development; identifying the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area, accepting and approving the technical report identifying the roadway needs within the benefit area, adopting roadway development impact fees for that area, and providing an effective date. DISCUSSION On September 30, 2004 the Town of Marana released an Impact Fee Report recommending the adoption a new impact fees for park development and for arterial and collector roadways in Northwest Marana. The analysis recommended a new impact fee in the amount of $6,315 per dwelling unit for roadway development in Northwest Marana. Copies of the Impact Fee Report have been available at Town Hall, and have been distributed to developers and builders working within the Town. Presentations on the new fee proposal were made at a developers' roundtable October 6th and at the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association (SAHBA) Technical Committee on October 19th. Comments have been received from four organizations, including a request from SAHBA for an extended review period due to the complexity of the impact fee report and the time constraints associated with the end of year and holiday season. A public hearing on the proposed impact fee was held on December 7, 2004. There were no speakers on this matter, however staff recommended that the adoption of the new impact fees be delayed until after February 1, 2005 in order to allow for full comment and review by SAHBA. SAHBA subsequently engaged EPS, a highly regarded public finance and impact fee consultant from Sacramento to perform a peer review of the Impact Fee Report. The analysis was presented to the Town for comment and consideration on February 14th. The EPS analysis was principally concerned with the lack of consideration of commercial and other nonresidential land uses in the formulation of the impact fee amount. The report, while not arguing that the Town's methodology was inappropriate, did suggest that Town should consider the transportation impacts nonresidential land uses impose, particularly with respect to interchange related expense. The nonresidential uses projected to occur within the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area will occur predominantly near interchanges. The Northwest Marana Area Plan identifies the preferred location of these uses adjacent to the interstate, in order to help buffer the residential developments from the interstate. As such, the impact that nonresidential development will have on the area arterials and collectors will be from residents within the benefit area; the users of these developments from outside the benefit area will principally impact the area interchanges. For this reason, staff supports the inclusion of nonresidential uses in the determination of the impact fee amount associated with interchange improvements. Considering the impact of nonresidential land uses on allocation of interchange costs, the recommended impact fee for the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area is $5,941 per equivalent dwelling unit. RECOMMENDA TION Staff recommends the adoption of an impact fee for the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area in the amount of$5,941 per equivalent dwelling unit. SUGGESTED MOTION I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2005.12. -2- MARANA ORDINANCE NO. 2005.12 RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT; IDENTIFYING THE NORTHWEST MARANA TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA, ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE TECHNICAL REPORT IDENTIFYING THE ROADWAY NEEDS WITHIN THE BENEFIT AREA, ADOPTING ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR THAT AREA, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Town is authorized by A.R.S. § 9-463.05 to assess and collect development impact fees to offset costs to the Town associated with providing necessary public services to a development; and WHEREAS, the technical report entitled "Development Impact Fee Study; Northwest Marana Roadways, Parks" ("the Technical Report") identifies the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area and detennines the fair-share roadway development impact fees attributable to the typical single-family residence, which shall be used as the equivalent demand unit ("EDU"), within the area; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report identifies the number of EDUs anticipated to be constructed within the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report detennines the Town's reasonably anticipated costs for providing interchange, arterial and collector roadway improvements needed to serve the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report adequately considers the contributions made or to be made in the future by property owners within the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area toward or for the construction of the identified roadway improvements; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report contains all documentation that supports the assessment of the Northwest Marana Transportation Development Impact Fee; and WHEREAS, the Technical Report was released to the public and at least thirty days' advance notice of intention to assess the Northwest Marana Transportation Development Impact Fee was given, and a public hearing was held on the proposed fee, all in accordance with A.R.S. § 9-463.05. NOW, THEREFORE, THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, do hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area, being that area bounded by the Santa Cruz River on the west and south, the Central Arizona Project Canal on the east, and Pinal County Road on the north, is hereby established. SECTION 2. The Northwest Marana Transportation Development Impact Fee is hereby adopted in the amount of$5,941 per EDU. SECTION 3. Town Staff shall collect the Northwest Marana Transportation Development Impact Fee upon issuance of building permits for each residential development within the Northwest Marana Transportation Benefit Area. SECTION 4. When calculating the amount of the Northwest Marana Transportation Development Impact Fee to be collected for a given residential development, Town Staff shall determine the development's anticipated impact in comparison to the typical single-family residence, using the methods and equivalencies set forth in the Technical Report. SECTION 5. When assessing the Northwest Marana Transportation Development Impact Fee, Town Staff shall give credit for the required dedication of public sites and improvements provided by the property owner for the identified interchange, arterial and collector road improvements, as provided by law. SECTION 6. All Northwest Marana Transportation Development Impact Fees collected by the Town shall be held and disbursed in accordance with the requirements of A.R.S. § 9-463.05. SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall be effective ninety days after its formal adoption by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Mar ana. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Marana, Arizona, this 5th day of April, 2005. Bobby Sutton, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney 2 TOWN COUNCIL MEETING TOWN OF MARANA INFORMATION MEETING DATE: April 5, 2005 AGENDA ITEM: IX. B. 6 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: Michael Racy, Consultant SUBJECT: State Lef!islative Issues: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending bills before the Legislature DISCUSSION This item is scheduled for each regular council Meeting in order to provide an opportunity to discuss any legislative item that might arise during the current session of the State Legislature. Periodically, an oral report may be given to supplement the Legislative Bulletins. ATTACHMENTS Legislative Bulletins, Issues 9, 10 and 11. RECOMMENDATION Upon the request of Council, staff will be pleased to provide recommendations on specific legislative issues. SUGGESTED MOTION N one required. JCB/03/30/2005/9:08 AM ,,~ -@ ~z·~ IN THIS ISSU E Cable Bill Passes House ........... 1 Budget Process Shifts into High Gear. . . . . 1 Tax Incentive Bills Continue to Move .. 2 Bills of Interest on the House and Senate Floor ............ 2 League of Arizona ~a~ Cities\\I,Towns Legislative Bulletin is published by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. Forward your comments or suggestions to: League of Arizona Cities & Towns 1820 West Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Phone: 602-258-5786 Fax: 602-253-3874 Email: league@mg.state.az.us Internet: www.azleague.org LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN Issue No.9 March 10, 2005 Cable Bill Passes House As expected, H. 2563, Cable Television; Services passed the House of Representatives this week. It's passage now shifts the entire focus of the debate over cable license fees to the Senate, where President Ken Bennett has indicated that he would like to see a compromise that would not fiscally harm cities and towns. President Bennett has taken steps to facilitate a dialogue between the cable industry and municipalities to find a better solution to address taxing inequities among various service providers while not harming the revenue streams of local governments. As part of this process, he agreed to at least temporarily delay moving the legislation in the Senate. Prior to his intervention, legislation was being "fast tracked" in both the House and Senate, which is a process that expedites the timeline for passing a bill. While President Bennett agreed to take the bills off of the "fast track" and to pursue an alternative proposal, he has not committed to oppose H. 2563 if no other alternative can be agreed upon. He believes a better long-term tax policy can be achieved and is willing to participate in discussions now and over the summer to craft a better tax structure. However, he also believes that future discussions could still occur if H. 2563 were to pass this session. Obviously that would not be our preference. We will continue to work with President Bennett regarding a dialogue on tax reform for cable and other television service providers and will do so regardless of the outcome of the legislation this session, but we will not support the passage of H. 2563 in its current form. As we have no guarantee that H.2563 will not be held, the timing is right to contact your Senators once again in opposition to the bill. No licenses are scheduled to expire within the next two years so there is ample time to develop a better option without rushing to pass H. 2563 this year. The bill adds State restrictions to local taxing authority that is already restricted by the federal government. The State is offering a tax break to a special interest but they are doing it with local revenue not their own. Your Senators should also be reminded that they have been spending a considerable amount of time recently criticizing local tax incentives yet here they are considering one of their own on behalf of the cable industry. H. 2563 passed the House by a vote of 36-23. Thanks to Representative Tom Prezelski for speaking against this bill on the floor. We will keep you updated on developments in the Senate, but again, please contact your Senators to voice your opposition to the bill. Budget Process Shifts into High Gear As evidenced by a relatively short Bulletin this week, committee work and legislative action has been light, as legislators are scrambling to finish work on the budget and garner the necessary votes for the budget to pass the Senate and House and to be sent to the Governor. There were several caucuses in the Senate this week to unveil and discuss the budget plan adopted by the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senate Appropriations Chair Bob Burns indicated yesterday that he will be working within the Republican caucus to address members' concerns in order to gain the 16 votes needed for the budget to pass the Senate. The House budget process has not been as visible as the Senate, as they have not been using the caucus meetings, which are open to the public, to communicate on their budget work. Senate leadership has indicated that they hope to have the budget process wrapped up by next week and want to ensure that the Governor will approve the budget. - continued - In terms of local government issues within the budget, we were concerned to see a $5.6 million cut to urban revenue sharing listed as one of the revenue options. Although the Senate Appropriations Committee wisely decided to reject this cut and it is not contained within the current Senate budget plan, it is still troubling to see it listed. However, with Senator Bob Burns as Appropriations Chair, it is not surprising that such a local revenue hit is on the table as he has indicated that he will continue to try to reduce local revenue sharing. At this time, we are closely monitoring budget talks to ensure that the urban revenue sharing cut does not resurface and are communicating with legislators on the importance of state shared revenue. Should it arise, we will make sure to let you know right away. Tax Incentive Bills Continue to Move The three tax incentives bills impacting cities and towns continued their progress through Senate floor debate and final votes this week. S. 1274, which is the bill sponsored by Senator Jay Tibshraeny, is one procedural step ahead of the other two bills, S. 1287, also sponsored by Senator Tibshraeny, and S. 1201, which is Senator Ken Cheuvront's bill. On Tuesday, S. 1274 passed the Senate by a vote of 22-6 and now moves to the House. S. 1287 and S. 1201 are scheduled for final Senate votes later today. With three different bills on the same subject, it may be difficult to keep track of what each bills does. Here is a quick recap on the provisions of each bill: S. 1201, Municipal Tax Incentives; Prohibition; Penalty (Cheuvront) - Subtracts the amount of a tax incentive offered by a city or town from that municipality's state shared revenue and was amended to only pertain to Maricopa County and to exclude infrastructure, redevelopment, historical district and brownfield projects. The bill was further amended on the Senate floor to require that an incentive that is given in exchange for a business's expenses must be limited to the actual cost of the expenses. S. 1274, Municipal Sales Tax Incentives; Restrictions (Tibshraeny) - Requires a municipality to make a finding prior to adopting a tax incentive that the incentive will raise more money than the amount of the incentive and that without the incentive, the business would not have located in that city or town. The bill was amended to require the status of the incentive to be reported every two years to prove that the incentive cost is less than the return within the duration of the agreement and that this incentive cost be pre-verified by an independent third party. The business or person receiving the tax incentive is prohibited from paying for the third party verification. It was also amended to require a two-thirds vote of the governing body and at least two weeks notice prior to approving a tax incentive agreement. The amendment also included the provisions of S. 1287 relating to emergency measures, which is described below. S. 1287. Municipal Business Incentives; Referendum (Tibshraeny) - Prohibits a city or town from adopting a tax incentive through a vote with an emergency clause measure. Bills of Interest on the House and Senate Floor There were numerous bills debated or voted on in the House and Senate floor this week that impact cities and towns, both positively and negatively. Below is a quick update and summary of the bills. H. 2053, Municipal Ballot Measures; Signature (Huffman) - Changes the requirement for municipalities under 50,000 for signatures required to place a municipal referendum on a ballot from 10% of the citizens who voted in the last city or town election to 10% of the city or town residents that voted in the last gubernatorial or presidential election, H. 2053 passed House floor debate on Wednesday and is expected to receive a final House vote next week. H. 2119, Photo Enforcement; Civil Penalties (Biggs) - The bill now allows a person who receives a photo radar civil traffic violation to pay their fine off within three weeks and not have any points deducted or insurance company notification up to three times in one year. After the fourth time in a one-year period, insurance company notification and MVD points would begin to accrue. H. 2119 also caps the fine for photo radar civil traffic violations at $50 and exempts red light cameras, criminal speeding and school zones. This bill passed the House this week by a vote of 32- 24. H. 2131, County Islands; Annexation; Property Rights (Biggs) - Would have preempted municipalities from requiring connections to public sewer systems or changing land use regulations on lands annexed from county islands. It was amended in the House Counties & Municipalities Committee to limit the preemption to residential lots of 15,000 square feet or greater and to provide greater discretion regarding public sewer requirements. It is scheduled to be debated on the House floor later today. - continued - LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN PAGE 2 March 10, 2005 H. 2260, Photo Enforcement Traffic Complaints (Gray) - Another bill that would negatively impact photo radar, this bill requires cities and towns to demonstrate at a hearing on a photo radar citation that the defendant was driving the vehicle and the photo enforcement device was in proper working order at the time of the violation. H. 2260 also contains several other anti-photo radar provisions. It passed the House this week by a vote of 32-26. H. 2277, Water Providers; Water Plans (O'Halleran) - Requires community water systems to submit a water plan to the Arizona Department of Water Resources that includes water supply, drought preparedness and water conservation components. The bill passed House floor debate yesterday and is expected to receive a final House vote next week. HCR 2006, Municipal Debt; Capacity (Nelson) - This legislation is a League resolution that asks voters at the 2006 general election to amend the Constitution to allow municipal debt limitations on public safety and transportation projects to be set at 20%, rather than the cu rrent 6%. It passed the House th is week by a vote of 41- 18. S. 1186, ASRS; Contribution Rates (Martin) - This bill passed the Senate Finance Committee with a strike- everything amendment that caps the employer and employee contribution rates for the Arizona State Retirement System at 6.25% for the next fiscal year (FY 06) and funds actuarial studies to determine the appropriate contribution rate for FY 07. It also raises the contribution rate floor for employers and employees from two to four percent and prohibits a contribution rate increase or decrease of over 10% in one year. The bill is scheduled to be debated on the Senate floor later this afternoon. S. 1330, Vehicle Speed Limits (Verschoor) - This bill applies to interstate highways outside of urban areas and would strike the maximum speed limit and allow the Arizona Department of Transportation director to adopt a speed limit that is greater than 65 miles per hour under certain conditions. This bill passed the Senate by a vote of 16-12. S. 1380, Local Obligation Bonds; Amount (Martin) - This bill is a League resolution and seeks to remove the limitations on General Obligation bond issue premiums, which would allow the additional revenue from the premiums to be used as part of the debt service on the bond, lowering the interest owed by the municipality. The bill is scheduled to be debated on the Senate floor later this afternoon. S. 1413, Liquor Licenses; Ownership; Local Agreements (Huppenthal) - Adds regulations on hidden ownership of liquor establishments to prevent unsuitable individuals from controlling a liquor license. This bill is originally the result of a League resolution, but was amended as a result of contentious stakeholder meetings with the liquor industry. S. 1413 is scheduled to be debated on the Senate floor later this afternoon. S. 1477, Local Planning; Residences; Fee Prohibition (Bee) - Forbids a county, municipality or special taxing district from requiring that certain housing be designated for sale to a specific class of purchasers. Passed the Senate this week by a vote of 23-5. S. 1488, Persons Lawfully Detained; Identification Requirement (Tibshraeny) - A League resolution that requires a person who has been lawfully detained on suspicion that the person has committed or was planning to commit a crime to state his or her true full name. If the person does not supply his or her name, the bill makes the person guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor. It was amended in the Senate Judiciary Committee with three new provisions relating to self-incrimination and law enforcement advising suspects of the requirement to state their name. It is scheduled to be debated on the Senate floor later this afternoon. SCR 1034, Secondary Taxes; Supermajority Voter Approval (Burns) - This legislation would place a measure on the next general election ballot to require a two-thirds vote of the qualified electors of a city, town, county, community college district or school district seeking voter authorization for a property tax levy for expenditures in excess of budget limits prescribed by law, payment of principal, interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness or any other residential property tax that is exempt from constitutional limitations and that requires voter approval. It is scheduled to be debated on the Senate floor later this afternoon. LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN PAGE 3 March 10, 2005 IN THIS ISSU E Budget Efforts Hit Full Force . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 Mixed Results on Transportation and Photo Radar Bills this Week. 1 Ceilings, Floors and Other Proposed Changes for Retirement Systems 2 League Resolution on Bonds Passes Senate 2 Forest Health Bills Continue to Advance. 2 Referendum Signatures Legislation Fails Twice 3 League of ,\rizolla ~a~ Cities.\ITovvns Legislative Bulletin is published by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. Forward your comments or suggestions to: League of Arizona Cities & Towns 1820 West Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Phone: 602-258-5786 Fax: 602-253-3874 Email: league@mg.state.az.us Internet: www.azleague.org LEG ISLA TIVE BU LLETI N Issue No.1 0 March 17,2005 Budget Efforts Hit Full Force Budget May be Completed by Tomorrow House and Senate leadership reached a tentative budget compromise Wednesday and there is a strong effort to draft, hear and vote on the budget bills today and Friday and to have the budget finished by the end of this week. Most of the action on Wednesday and Thursday was cancelled in order to give legislative leaders time to meet with the members and secure their votes on the budget compromise. Late Wednesday night, the budget bills were officially introduced. The budget compromise does not contain any cuts to state shared revenue, which is good news after earlier attempts this session from Senator Bob Burns to cut urban revenue sharing. Two issues of interest to municipalities that are in the budget deal are a reallocation of State Lottery funds affecting local transportation funding (L T AF II) and changes to the property tax assessment ratio. The proposed budget would give additional proceeds from the Powerball game to the State General Fund, which reduces the amount going to local transportation funding. This year, cities and towns receive approximately $13 million and under the new budget, they would receive less than half of the current allocation for L T AF II. One of the budget bills as originally introduced, would modify the commercial property tax assessment ratio and the homeowners' property tax rebates. However, it appears that the bill was amended in committee to lengthen the phase-in of the property tax assessment changes from five years to ten years, which would greatly reduce the financial impact to cities and towns. Budget negotiations and last minute changes are taking place as this article is being written. The budget is currently a moving picture, but we may know more by the time the House and Senate Appropriations Committees hear the bills and they make their way to floor debate and a vote by late tonight or tomorrow. Of course, these bills will have to cross the Governor's desk as well which could potentially have a tremendous impact on the substance and timing of an enacted budget. We will make sure to keep in touch with you as soon as budget details become more clear. Mixed Results on Transportation and Photo Radar Bills This Week This Tuesday, the Senate passed one bad bill relating to photo radar on freeways and then immediately voted down the next bill on the same subject. S. 1164, Photo Radar; Controlled Access Highways originally failed the Senate on March 2nd by a vote of 14-16, but passed on Tuesday by a vote of 1 8-1 2 on reconsideration. Th is legislation bans the use of photo radar on freeways and would harm efforts by the city of Scottsdale in coordination with DPS to use photo radar on the Loop 101 Freeway, however, the future effects of the ban could be felt by many municipalities that are concerned with the safety of freeways within their borders. Another bill that would have also impacted Scottsdale's photo radar and traffic stops on the Loop 101 Freeway, as well as any other cities and towns that issue citations on freeways, was S. 1187, which failed the Senate on Tuesday by a vote of 13-17, The bill had been amended significantly from its original form, which would have been extremely harmful to cities and towns. As originally written, the strike-everything amendment to S. 1187 would have diverted 75% of all fees, fines, forfeitures and civil penalties for traffic violations collected by municipal courts in excess of the monies collected by the courts in calendar year 2005 to go the DPS Fund to hire highway patrol officers and purchase operational equipment. The bill was amended to only include traffic citations issued on freeways, but Senators still wisely decided that funds from citations issued by city and town police officers need to go to cities and towns, not DPS. - continued - Two other transportation bills that were up this week were S. 1038, Defensive Driving School; Eligibility and S. 1324, Speed Limit; Eighty-Five Per Cent. S. 1038 would allow a person who has received a civil traffic violation who goes to court to fight the ticket to be eligible to attend defensive driving school, even if the court finds them guilty. Cities and towns and the courts have been lobbying against this bill, which was assigned to the House Transportation Committee after passing the Senate. The House Transportation Committee has posted this bill on several agendas, but the bill has been held each time, which likely means there are not enough votes to pass the Committee. if your city or town has any members on the House Transportation Committee, please continue to encourage them to oppose this legislation. S. 1324 is another bill that did not see movement for quite some time but has now reappeared. It is expected to be considered by the full Senate next week. This legislation requires the maximum speed on any state highway to be set at the speed at which 85% of the vehicles on the highway are traveling without consideration of any other factors. Because there are so many roads in cities and towns that are designated as state highways, this legislation could directly impact transportation safety in your community. Please urge your senators to vote against this legislation. Ceilings, Floors and Other Proposed Changes for Retirement Systems There are currently several bills in the House and Senate that affect the Arizona State Retirement System (ASRS) and the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS). ironically, one bill caps the contribution rate for employees and employers and another raises the minimum employer contributions required. Another bill addresses the service purchase of military credit as it relates to the legislation that passed last year that allowed councils of government and other political subdivision organizations to join ASRS. The bill seeking to raise the floor on employer contributions applies to PSPRS and would negatively impact some cities and towns. S.1366, Minimum Employer Contribution Limits raises the floor for employer contributions to PSPRS from two percent to five percent. The net effect of this legislation is to mandate an arbitrary minimum amount of contribution from employers regardless of the relative health of the fund and if a lower contribution would retain fund solvency. S. 1366 passed the House Public Institutions & Retirement Committee this week and moves next to the Appropriations B Committee for consideration. Please contact your legislators on this committee and urge them to vote against this bill. One other retirement related bill that we are watching is H. 2474, ASRS; Credited Military Service; Purchase. This legislation allows employees of the councils of government and other political subdivision entities that were permitted to join ASRS under legislation from last year to purchase military service at the same rate they were allowed to purchase other service. H. 2474 passed the House by a vote of 48-8 this week and moves next to the Senate. We will keep you posted on the retirement legislation. League Resolution on Bonds Passes Senate On Tuesday, the Senate passed S. 1380, Local Obligation Bonds; Amount, which is a League resolution brought forward by the city of Scottsdale. This bill removes the limitations on General Obligation bond issue premiums, which will allow the additional revenue from the premiums to be used as part of the debt service on the bond, lowering the interest owed by the municipality. Thanks to Senator Dean Martin for bringing this bill forward. The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 29-1 with Senator Robert Blendu casting the lone "no" vote. S. 1380 is now awaiting committee assignments in the House. Forest Health Bills Continue to Advance The three pieces of legislation introduced this session to address forest health have passed their respective chambers of origin. H. 2276, Healthy Forest Amendments, is sponsored by Representative Tom O'Halleran and results from discussions in the interim by the Governor's Forest Health Council, and makes numerous changes to the tax credits portion. The other two bills, H. 2613 and S. 1337, are identical to each other and also make numerous changes to the healthy forests tax credits enacted last year. Representative Cheryl Chase and Senator Marilyn Jarrett are the sponsors of H. 2613 and S. 1337. This week H. 2276 and H. 2613 both passed the House and are now ready for Senate consideration. S. 1337 passed the Senate last week and has been transmitted to the House. There are differences that remain between the bills, particularly in the definition of a qualifying forest product. As with the original forest health tax credits legislation last year, the Governor has indicated that she would like the parties to continue to meet and to send only one forest health bill to her desk. The League will be closely watching the forest health bills and will keep you posted on their progress. LEGISLATIVE BUllETIN PAGE 2 March 1 7, 2005 Referendum Signatures Legislation Fails Twice The referendum signatures bill failed the House on Monday by a vote of 16-42 and then subsequently failed again by a vote of 12-43. H. 2053, Municipal Ballot Measures; Signature would allow municipalities under 50,000 to change the requirement for signatures to place a referendum on the ballot from 10% of the citizens who voted in the last city or town election to 10% of the city or town residents that voted in the last gubernatorial or presidential election. This bill was originally introduced as H. 2351, Municipal Ballot Measures; Signatures, however, it was double assigned to the House Counties, Municipalities & Military Affairs (CMMA) Committee and the House Judiciary Committee and did not receive a hearing in the Judiciary Committee. The bill was resurrected as H, 2053 with a strike-everything amendment to a bill that was only assigned to the CMMA Committee. A bill can be voted again after initial failure for several reasons, one of the reasons that legislators motion to reconsider a bill after its failure is because of a House rule that if a bill fails twice, that subject matter cannot be reconsidered for the rest of the session. This means that the referendum signatures issue cannot be brought up in the House again for the rest of the legislative session. As many of you will remember, this is not the first time that the effort to raise the required number of referendum signatures, in one form or another, has met an untimely ending. Referendum signatures bills in the previous years passed the Legislature only to be vetoed by both Republican and Democratic governors. LEGISLATIVE BUllETIN March 17,2005 PAGE 3 IN THIS ISSUE County Islands Bill is Defeated in the House .., 1 Cable Discussions Fall Apart in the Eleventh Hour . . . . . 1 Budget Update Round One: Veto, Round Two: Negotiations Starti ng ............... 2 Good News! Bill Requiring a Supermajority Vote on Bond Issues Likely Dead in the Senate. .......... ....2 More Good News! Defensive Driving School Bill Goes Away . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ASRS Contribution Rate News . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Tax Incentives Bills Assigned to a House Committee ... 3 Development Fees Reporting Mandate Passes the House ................ 4 Lcaguc of Arizona ~a~ CHIeS \\110\vns Legislative Bulletin is published by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. Forward your comments or suggestions to: League of Arizona Cities & Towns 1820 West Washington Street Phoenix. Arizona 85007 Phone: 602-258-5786 Fax: 602-253-3874 Email: league@mg.state.az.us Internet: www.azleague.org LEG ISLA TIVE BU LLETI N Issue No. 11 March 25, 2005 County Islands Gillis Defeated in the House We are pleased to report that the House failed H. 2131, County Islands; Annexation; Property Rights yesterday by a vote of 30-29, falling just one vote short of the required 31 votes needed to pass. Thanks to quick thinking and a smart procedural move by Representative Linda Lopez, the bill is now permanently dead for the year and cannot be brought back. Moments after the bill failed, Representative Lopez made a motion for the bill to be reconsidered, which failed. House Rules state that once a motion to reconsider a bill has been made and fails, that same motion cannot be made again, which means there is no way for the bill to return, even if bill supporters garner the additional vote needed to pass. H. 2131 is the legislation that originally would have preempted municipalities from requiring connections to public sewer systems or changing land use regulations on lands annexed from county islands. It was amended in the House Counties & Municipalities Committee to limit the preemption to residential lots of 15,000 square feet or greater and to provide greater discretion regarding public sewer requirements. While the amendment scaled down the impact of the bill, H. 2131 was a dangerous precedent for setting two different types of land use regulations in a city or town for those areas that are annexed from county islands and those that are not. It also further differentiated the land use regulations based on lot size. Our thanks to Representative Tom Prezelski for his strong opposition and comments against this bill and to Representative Lopez for her quick thinking. Below is a link to how the House members voted, if your city or town's representatives voted "no", please be sure to thank them. House vote on H. 2131: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp ?i n Doc = /legtext/4 71eg/1 r/bills/hb21 31 . hth i rd,1.asp Cable Discussions Fall Apart in the Eleventh Hour Despite efforts led by Senate President Ken Bennett to reach a compromise on cable legislation, it has become apparent that an agreement between local governments and the cable industry will not be reached this session. Earlier this week, we informed Senator Bennett that the latest compromise language put on the table was not acceptable to cities and towns. As next week is the last week scheduled to hear bills in committee, we have run out of time to negotiate and H. 2563 will likely be heard in the Senate Finance Committee next Thursday morning. With the heavily anticipated passage of the bill in committee, a showdown on the Senate floor the week after is likely to occur. All current indications are that the full Senate is closely divided on this issue. As you will recall, H. 2563 will limit your license fees to the lesser of 5% or 1 % plus your TPT rate once your current license agreement expires and preempt your ability to require in-kind services as part of your next license agreement. In the event that you do negotiate for in- kind, you would be required to credit the value of the in-kind at fair market value against the level of license fees owed by the cable company. We expect a major battle over this issue in the Senate, We also fully expect the cable industry to lobby the Senators relentlessly. We will need to be equal to the task. Please contact your Senators and once again express your opposition to this bill. Budget Update Round One: Veto, Round Two: Negotiations Starting The House and Senate passed their budget late into the night last Thursday and Friday morning, honoring their deadline to finish budget work by the week in which the 65th day of the legislative session fell. Senate President Ken Bennett and House Speaker Jim Weiers met with Governor Napolitano early this week regarding the budget, however, on Monday afternoon when the budget bills reached the Governor's desk, she vetoed the bills. The Governor cited lack of funding for expanding the all-day kindergarten program, a new medical school campus for the University of Arizona in downtown Phoenix and cuts to various state agencies and social service programs as the reasons for her veto. With the veto, it appears that new budget negotiations will begin between legislative leaders and the Governor. President Bennett and Speaker Weiers have indicated that they will commence the negotiations very soon, possibly this week. Legislative leadership has been very committed to adjourning the legislative session in 100 days and although the veto complicates reaching that goal, all indications are that an April 15th Sine Die adjournment is still their target. Speaker Weiers went so far as to suggest holding extra committee hearings during the week and in the evenings, rather than extending the deadline to hear bills in committees any longer than next week. As we reported last week, the budget did not contain any cuts to state shared revenue and the two issues of interest to municipalities that were in the budget were a reallocation of State Lottery funds affecting local transportation funding (L T AFII) and changes to the property tax assessment ratio. The budget would have given additional proceeds from the Powerball game to the State General Fund, which reduced the amount going to local transportation funding. This year, cities and towns receive approximately $13 million and under the formula in the budget, they would have received less than half of that current allocation. If you speak to your legislators, please let them know how this cut would impact your city or town and that this proposal should be left out of the new budget. One of the budget bills as originally introduced, would have modified the commercial property tax assessment ratio from 25% to 20% and the homeowners' property tax rebates. However, the bill was amended to lengthen the phase-in of the property tax assessment changes from five years to ten years, which would provide municipalities with considerably more time to prepare for the adjustments. We will keep you updated on the details of the budget negotiations. Please make sure to thank your legislators for not touching state shared revenue in the budget that passed the Legislature and encourage them to leave state shared revenue out of any future budget negotiations. Good News! Bill Requiring a Supermajority Vote on Bond Issues Likely Dead in the Senate Thanks to your lobbying efforts against SCR 1034, Secondary Taxes; Supermajority Voter Approval, we are pleased to report that this legislation has not yet come up for floor debate in the Senate. The resolution is likely dead for the session as Senate floor debate shifts to work on House bills and resolutions coming through the process and any remaining Senate bills or resolutions that have not been debated on the Senate floor will not be advancing at this point. The Senate could always add this resolution at the last minute or it could reemerge as a strike-everything amendment later in the session, however, at this point it appears that the bill's sponsor, Senator Bob Burns, has failed to garner enough votes for SCR 1034 to pass the Senate. This extremely bad legislation would place a measure on the next general election ballot to require a two-thirds vote of the qualified electors of a city, town, county, community college district or school district seeking voter authorization for a property tax levy for expenditures in excess of budget limits prescribed by law, payment of principal, interest and redemption charges on bonded indebtedness or any other residential property tax that is exempt from constitutional limitations and that requires voter approval. SCR 1034 would have made it extremely difficult for city and town bond measures to pass and would have endangered some very important projects in your community. Thank you to all of the cities and towns that contacted your Senators regarding this legislation. This is just one example of how personal calls and emails from a legislator's local community can make the difference. We will make sure to keep you posted should the issue reemerge and if further calls need to be made on this issue. More Good News! Defensive Driving School Bill Goes Away Yesterday, the House Transportation Committee finally did away with a bad bill that would have had serious impacts on your courts and police departments. S. 1038, Defensive Driving School; Eligibility would have allowed a person who has received a civil traffic violation who goes to court to fight the ticket to be eligible to attend defensive driving school, even if the court finds them guilty. According to some estimates, this bill had the potential to double your court's caseload. - continued - LEGISLATIVE BULLETIN PAGE 2 March 25, 2005 S. 1038 was amended Thursday in the House Transportation Committee with a strike-everything amendment that changed the bill's topic to a completely different subject on education. We have been assured that the original version of S. 1038 will not be returning, which means it is dead for the session. Thank you to all of the cities and towns that spoke to their legislators against this bill. On another positive note, two other harmful transportation bills were held this week, as it appears the bill's sponsors are still trying to garner enough votes for the bills to pass committee. The Senate Transportation Committee held H. 2260, Photo Enforcement Traffic Complaints, which would require cities and towns to demonstrate at a hearing on a photo radar citation that the defendant was driving the vehicle and the photo enforcement device was in proper working order at the time of the violation. H. 2260 also contains several other anti-photo radar provisions. The House Transportation Committee held S. 1164, Photo Radar; Controlled Access Highways, which would ban the use of photo radar on freeways and would harm efforts by the city of Scottsdale in coordination with DPS to use photo radar on the Loop 101 Freeway. The future effects of the ban could be felt by many municipalities that are concerned with the safety of freeways within their borders. We have been notified that both H. 2260 and S. 1164 will be returning next week. If your city or town's legislators are on either the House or Senate Transportation Committee, please make sure to let them know that you oppose both of these bills, as they are an unnecessary intrusion into local control of transportation safety matters. ASRS Contribution Rate News There was both legislative and non-legislative action this week on the FY 06 contribution rates for the Arizona State Retirement System (ASRS). In November, the ASRS Board approved an increase from the current 5.7"/0 contribution rate for retirement and long-term disability to 8.25"/0 for both employees and employers. As those cities and towns that are ASRS members are likely aware, there has been much discussion at the Legislature regarding the impacts of the ASRS contribution rate increase. As mentioned in the Bulletin several weeks ago, Senator Dean Martin introduced a strike-everything amendment to S. 1186 that would have capped the employer and employee contribution rates for ASRS at 6.25"/0 for the next fiscal year (FY 06) and funded actuarial studies to determine the appropriate contribution rate in FY 07. It also raised the contribution rate floor for employers and employees from two to four percent and prohibited a contribution rate increase or decrease of over 10"/0 in one year. When S. 1186 was debated on the Senate floor, however, this amendment was not added to the bill, which meant that the bill reverted to its original subject and no longer addressed contribution rates. Yesterday, the House approved an amendment for H. 2718 that is almost identical to the S. 1186 amendment. The one difference is that H. 2718 now dictates a contribution rate of 6.9"/0 for retirement and retains the current 0.5"/0 long- term disability contribution rate for a total FY 06 contribution rate of 7.4"/0. Another major development was the announcement that the ASRS actuary revised their rate adjustment recommendation from the combined rate of 8.25"/0 down to 7.4"/0, which is the same as the one mandated in H. 2718. The ASRS change is significant because it takes away the State Constitutional question of whether or not the Legislature has the authority to adjust the rates. With both the Legislature and ASRS on the same page for the new 7.4"/0 contribution rate, it would appear that this proposal has momentum to move through the Legislature. We will keep you posted on any new developments on this subject. Tax Incentives Bills Assigned to a House Committee This week all three of the tax incentives bills that passed the Senate were assigned to the House Ways & Means Committee. This sets the stage for a committee hearing next week with potentially all of the bills on the same agenda. S. 1201 and S. 1274 are also listed on next week's Counties, Municipalities & Military Affairs Committee agenda, but have yet to be assigned to that Committee. Here is a recap on the bills as they passed the Senate: S. 1201, Municipal Tax Incentives; Prohibition; Penalty (Cheuvront) - Subtracts the amount of a tax incentive offered by a city or town from that municipality's state shared revenue and was amended to only pertain to Maricopa County and to exclude infrastructure, redevelopment, historical district and brownfield projects. The bill was amended on the Senate floor to further limit the application within urbanized Maricopa County and to require that an incentive that is given in exchange for a business's expenses must be limited to the actual cost of the expenses. S. 1274, Municipal Sales Tax Incentives; Restrictions (Tibshraeny) - Requires a municipality to make a finding prior to adopting a tax incentive that the incentive will raise more money than the amount of the incentive and that without the incentive, the business would not have located in that city or town. The bill was amended to require the status of the incentive to be reported every two years to prove that the incentive cost is less than the return within the duration of the agreement and that this incentive cost be pre-verified by an independent third party. The business or person receiving the tax incentive is prohibited from paying for the third party verification. It was also amended to require a two-thirds vote of the governing body and at least two weeks notice prior to approving a tax incentive - continued - lEGISLATIVE BUllETIN PAGE 3 March 25, 2005 agreement. The amendment also included the provisions of S. 1287 relating to emergency measures, which is described below. S. 1287. Municipal Business Incentives; Referendum (Tibshraeny) - Prohibits a city or town from adopting a tax incentive through a vote with an emergency clause measure. The members of the House Ways & Means and Counties, Municipalities & Military Affairs Committees are listed below. If you city or town has a legislator on either of these committees, please make sure to contact them in opposition to these bills. Ways & Means Steve Huffman - Chair Steve Yarbrough - Vice Chair Jack Brown Pamela Gorman Ann Kirkpatrick Leah Landrum Taylor Warde Nichols Michele Reagan Bob Stump Counties, Municipalities & Military Affairs John Nelson - Chair Jerry Weiers - Vice Chair Manny Alvarez Ted Carpenter Cheryl Chase T rish Groe Pete Hershberger Russ Jones Jonathan Paton Tom Prezelski Albert Tom Development Fees Reporting Mandate Passes the House As originally introduced by Representative John Nelson, H. 2066 would have required additional reporting on the assessment and use of development fees. The bill would have required the information to be provided to various state offices including the Governor and Legislature and preempts the ability of municipalities to collect impact fees if they have failed to submit reports to the State. Representative Nelson eventually decided to scale down the mandates and preemption by amending out the reporting requirement to the State and replacing it with language which requires the additional information to be filed with the city or town clerk. While much information regarding development fees is already compiled by cities and towns, the bill would likely mandate some new reporting for most municipalities as the intent of the bill is to obtain greater specificity in how development fees are used such as a specific list of capital projects funded by each development fee. This attack on cities and towns is brought to you by the Central Arizona Homebuilders Association and you may want to let the homebuilders in your community know that you don't appreciate this attack by their association and that the mandates that they are pursuing will be a disincentive for municipalities to commit to invest in providing adequate public infrastructure needed for their developments to occur. The bill passed the House and is on its way to the Senate. It will be heard in the Senate Committee on Government Accountability on Wednesday. lEGISLATIVE BUllETIN PAGE 4 March 25, 2005