Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/17/1996 Regular Council Meeting MinutesPLACE AND DATE Marana Town Hall December 17, 1996. I. CALL TO ORDER By Mayor Honea at 7:05 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Mayor Honea III. INVOCATION Led by Mayor Honea IV. ROLL CALL COUNCIL Ed Honea Sharon Price Tom Clark Ora Mae Ham Sherry Millner Herb Kai Bobby Sutton Jr. STAFF Hurvie Davis Dan Hochuli Sandra Groseclose Jerry Flannery Dave After Doug Maples Jane Johnson Roy Cuaron Hugh Holub Russell Dillow Jocelyn Entz 33 Members of the Public Mayor Vice-Mayor Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Town Manager Town Attorney Town Clerk Planning Administrator Town Engineer Chief Building Official Human Resources Director Finance Director Water Attorney Town Magistrate Assistant to the Town Manager V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A motion was made by Bobby Sutton~ Jr. seconded by Tom Clark and carried unanimously to approve the Agenda as written. VI. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES A motion was made by Bobby Sutton Jr,, seconded by Sharon Price and carried unanimously to approve khe nfmutes of the re~lar Town Council meeting of November 19, 1996. VII, CALL TO THE PUBLIC/ANNOUNCEMENTS Ben Hawkins, 66 E. Villas Circle, Tucson, AZ: Mr. Hawkins thanked the Town for their participation in the United Way campaign. Mr. Hawkins thanked the United Way committee that was made of up Town employees. Awards were handed out to all those in the committee, Lemarion Sanders, Myrlene Francis, Mike McLaughlin, Judy Capen, Mary Short and Michelle P. Hailer. Robert Sales, 13449 N. Warfield Circle: He wanted to talk to the Council about the ditches and culverts in the Adonis Subdivision. He would like to know when this project will be started, what action is going to be taken. Linda Coleman, 13480 Warfield Circle: She is also with the Adonis Association. She wanted to bring to the Council's attention problems between the Town of Marana with permits and the CC&R's of the Adonis Mobile Home Association. Dave Atler: Mr. Atler introduced Council to a new employee in the Public Works Department, Diahn Swartz who has replaced Abel Sanchez. Hurvie Davis: Harvey Gill will be leaving the Town of Marana, he will be moving to Georgia. He has been a real asset to this Community and it will be a loss. Ora Harn: Tomorrow there will be an open house and ribbon cutting for Deakin Realty which is opening a new office in Marana. Mayor Honea: The Chamber of Commerce is also holding an open house on Friday if any one would like to stop by. VIII. STAFF REPORTS Reports are on file at the Town Hall. IX. GENERAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A Consent Agenda 1. Resolution No. 96-109; Loop Road Agreement - Participation Agreement between the Town of Marana and Southwest Value Partners [SVP) for the financing and construction of the loop road located at the northwest corner of Cortaro Road and I-1[, and extending from the frontage road north of McDonald's to the west side of Jones Intcrcable. 2. Funding the design and construction of the loop road- The loop road is located at the northwest corner of Cortaro Road and 1-10 and extending from the frontage road north of McDonald's to the west side of Jones Intercable. 3. Resolution No. 96-116: Request for Liquor License - Request by Applicant, Kirby Brewer on behalf of Heritage Highlands at RedHawk Golf and Country. Club for the issuance of a Number 7 Liquor License. 4. Ordinance No. 96.48~ Resolution No. 96-1101 Harassment in the Workplace Policy Statement - Second readinE of amendment to the Town Personnel Policy. 5. Change of Council Meeting dates - Due to Holidays and elections. A motion was made by Sharon Price, seconded by Bobby Sutton, Jr. and carried unanimously to approve the Consent Agenda as written. B. Pl~blic Hearing; Cortaro/I-10 Annexation - Consideration and approval of an annexation of portions of Section 15~ 22, 23, 25~ 26, 27, 35 and 36 in Township 12 South~ Range 12 East; Gila ~ Salt River Meridian, Pima Count~,~ Arizona. Hurvie Davis: This property is primarily along Interstate 10, a four mile stretch. We are attempting to annex this area into the Town so 1-10 will be in the Town limits from the Pinal County line to the Rillito. Robert Barnes, 9353 N. Casa Grande Hwy.: This is not simply the annexation of the road, there is also a number of businesses that have been there for a number of years. Jerry Flannery: This annexation allows for coordination between the Arizona Department of Public Safety, ADOT and the Town of Marana in citing of tickets. It also provides for planning of transportation issues such as frontage roads, interchanges and how they tie in to the different roads that bisect the Interstate. It also squares up the Town boundaries. He has talked with some of the businesses, several of them have said given transition zoning they would sign. Mayor Hones declared Council out of Public Hearing. C. Public Hearing; Bents Vista/l-10 Corridor Annexation- Consideration and approval of an ann~ation of' portions of Section 5, 6, 8 and 9 in Township 12 South East; Gila ~ Salt River Meridian, Pima County, Arizona. Hurvie Davis: This is a similar annexation of about 4/10 of a square mile, it is approximately 2.5 miles along the Interstate. TEP is the majority property owner along with Southern Pacific Railroad. Mayor Hones declared Council out of Public Hearing. D. Public Hearing; Ordinance No. 96.49; Amendment to the CaiMat Specific Plan - Request for approval of an amendment to the CalMat Specific Plan, changing the present land use plan for Phase I from Resource Retraction of approximatelv 05 acres and agricultural of approximately 30 acres of resource extractiou of approximately 93.7 acres and plant site/storage of approximateiv 31.3 acres, located ~Tangerine Road and 1-101 in a portion of Section 6, Township 12 South, Range 12 East and a portion of Section 1, Township 12 South, Range 11 East, property owner is CalMat Company, P. O. Box 50212 Phoenix, AZ 85072. Hnrvie Davis: This is a Public Hearing on request from CalMat to approve an amendment to their Specific Plan, changing it to allow resource extraction of approximately 93.7 acres and plant site storage of approximately 31 acres. The need for the Specific Plan is due to the lack of the progress regarding installation of the bank protection along the Santa Cruz River. Jerry Flannery: On April 24th a Temporary Use Permit came in for approval, it specifically dealt with the relocation of a ready mix plant from CalMat's southern project to the location on Tangerine and the frontage road. That batch plant has been established under the Temporary Use Permit, that Permit was good for nine months. Since that time this Specific Plan amendment was submitted, it went to the Planning Commission on July 31, 1996. At that time it was recommended for approval. The Commission did recommend several conditions. He wanted to point out that a 200 foot buffer be provided on the eastern side as it abuts the Rillito community. Item #3, the embankment protection shall be constructed prior to any development after Phase I. Mainly that was to deal with the issue of having construction activity or excavation in a flood plain. Item 3 is already handled by several Ordinances in the Town, he doesn't believe that Item #3 is required. He would recommend that Item #3 be struck and that Item #4 be renumbered to Item #3. Mayor Hones declared Council out of Public Hearing. A motion was made by Ora Harn, seconded by Tom Clark and carried unanimously to approve Ordinance No. 96.49 the amendment to the CalMat Specific Plan pursuant to conditions 1 through 3 listed in the recommendation above. E. Second Public Hearing; Resolution No. 96-112 - Alternative Expenditure Limitation }Home Rule Option} Hurvie Davis: This is our second Public Hearing to allow the Town to utilize the Home Rule Option on the expenditure limitation without the override which would go to the voters hopefully for a favorable approval by the voters. We would be limited this coming fiscal year to a budget of $1.8 million, the second year $2.3 million, third year $3.0 million and the fourth year $3.8 million. Under the Home Rule Option we will be asking for expenditures of $15.4 million, $15.8 million, $16.1 million and $16.5 million instead. Our budget this year is $15.1 million, we would have to cut back considerably on services and programs that the Town is able to provide to the Community. We would like to go to the voters again to allow this override. Bobby Sutton, Jr.: Four years ago the Town's total budget was how much. Hurvie Davis: It was approximately $2.0 million. Bobby Sutton, Jr.: We need to let people know that if does not go through it may put some restrictions on the Town and eliminate some services. Hurvie Davis: That is correct and we will have to do a good job at that. The annexation of the Ina/Thornydale area, with the revenue has allowed the Town to have a larger budget and to provide scl-vices. Roy Cuaron: We received from the League of Cities and Towns some sample ballot language, it is pretty explicit on what they are voting on. Hurvie Davis: To have this budget limit which allows us to spend this, it will not mean a tax increase of any sort. Unless we get this override we will be unable to spend the money. A motion was made by Ora Hain, seconded by Sharon Price and carried unanimously to adopt Resolution No. 96-112, authorizing the Alternative Expenditure Limitation proposal to be placed before the voters in March, 1997. F. Ordinance No. 96.471 Twin Peaks and Lambert Lane Rezone - Consideration of approval of Ordinance No. 96.47 to rezone property consisting of 652 acres located on the North side of Twin Peaks Road and South of Lambert Lane in Section 18 and the Northwest 1/4 of Section 17~ T12S~ R12E, Assessor's Parcel Numbers 216-40-001, 216-40-002 and 226-05-032A, from Town Chssification C {Large Lot Zone{ to R-36 {Single Family Residential, Minimum Lot Size 36,000 Square Feet{t R-6 ]Single Family Residential~ Minimum Lot Size 6,000 Square Feet} and MH ]Manufactured Home}. Applicant is Best Associates, L. L. C., 6330 East Speedway, Suite 200, Tucson, AZ 85710. Hurvie Davis: This matter came before Council at the last meeting on December 3, 1996 in the form of a Public Hearing. Staff and the developer were not quite ready at that time to recommend to Council to take action because we still had some issues remaining that we were negotiating on. Jerry Flannery: Since the last meeting staff has been in discussion with the applicants on this project. The revised plan consists of 410 units on a manufactured home site of 100 acres. There is an addition of a 10 acre school site, that area is located in the northwest portion of that section. The estate lots where there were 24, there are now 12, the overall density has been reduced. We have discussed a number of issues with the applicant in the last two weeks, since the last Council meeting. Item No. 15 on the blue sheet has been taken out of the Ordinance, Item #14 has been modified to say, sewer utility has been removed and it is supposed to read water utility. Item No. 13 has also been removed. The Ordinance has 13 conditions. Bobby Sutton, Jr.: In Mr. Flannery's opinion is it ready to go, it seems like there is a lot of work that still needs to be done. Jerry Flannery: Yes he believes it is ready to go. The Town Engineer stated on #4 that the last sentence read instead of, will be required to construct necessary improvements. In discussion with Mr. Holub #13 is not necessary. Bobby Sutton, Jr.: In Mr. Flannery's opinion is this ready to go, there are a lot of conditions, it seems like there is still a lot of work to be done. Jerry Flannery: lie believes it is ready to go. The fifteen conditions that we originally came up with are still in his opinion satisfactory. However since the time of the blue sheet written several were discussed with other entities who wrote them and those entities felt they were necessary to be part of this blue sheet. That is why the changes were made. Mayor Hones: Mayor Honea had some questions on ltem #4. The developer will be required to construct necessary improvements to the frontage of this property. Has that been clarified. Twin Peaks Road does not front the entire property, it comes up at an angle and only fronts about 40% of the property. Was it Mr. Atler's understanding that the improvements would be the entire width of the property or just the piece that is on the property itsel£ Dave Atler: Pima County's project that they are proposing that is within the site analysis would begin at the Town limits and continue through Rattlesnake Pass down to the intersection of Twin Peaks and Silverbell Roads. This would carry us through whatever the necessary improvements would be from the end of the County's project to the west to the full frontage of this project. Mayor Honea: In the verbiage on whether or not the developer would be responsible for the improvement of Twin Peaks Road, it was understood that that would be four lanes and not two. Dave Atler: What was talked about initially was it would be four lanes based on the site analysis. In the site analysis they say it would occur within five years. What we're looking at is to identify what the impacts are, that is outlined in Item #1. Mayor Honea: It is his understanding looking at the County bond proposal that they don't intend to do the frontage anyway. Dave Atler: That is correct. Mayor Honea: They intend to do from Sidewinder up to the tie in with Silverbell Road. There is nothing in the bond proposals for Sidewinder and the rest of the frontage of this Twin Peaks property. The bond proposal is from Sidewinder back to Silverbell, so if that's the case then the developer would be required to do the improvements period. The County is not going to do the improvements inside the Town of Marana. Dave Atler: That is correct. Mayor Honea: Mayor Honea is concerned that if Council approves this and they are unable to obtain the necessary right-of-way for say a four lane structure, which he believe they will need when it is built out completely. He had asked for that to be addressed, for them to contact Arizona Portland Cement and see if that could be obtained. Dave Atler: In a meeting a few weeks ago they hoped to get a letter the following week that was essentially an agreement, they are not going to purchase the right-of-way unless they have the zoning in place. They don't want to expend the funds to buy the right-of-way from APC. We were expecting a letter saying they were at least agreeing that some right-of-way would be purchased there. We have not seen anything on that. Frank Thompson~ 8'/7 15. Alvernon: He represents the applicant for this project. He would like to go over a couple of the issues with the Council. The Twin Peak Road improvements may in fact not be in the current request for bonds. However, the Twin Peaks Road improvement is in fact part of the Silverbell Tortolita benefit area which has been identified by Pima County for road improvements. And it was just recently adopted by the Board of Supervisors. That Ordinance clearly pointed out the areas that are part of the road improvements, the sub-area roadway improvements that are proposed by Pima County. We provided a copy of that document to Staff with the first version of the site analysis. Pima County does not have a specific time table other than the five year requirement that is part of the development impacting ordinance. Within five years they are required to do this project or they have to go back, review the moneys they have collected over time and if they haven't built any improvements they have to refund the development impact fees that are kept in a separate account. We did provide Staff with a document that identified the Tortolita sub- regional benefit area, clearly marked is the sub-area roadways that Pima County intends to build as part of this project. What we have said to try to agree with Town staff concerning the questionable nature of the specific date of when Pima County would implement this improvement, that one of the zoning conditions that we have and that we agree to is not just this improvement but any improvements that are necessitated by this development will be clearly delineated in a traffic impact analysis that we do while we are in the platting process. The traffic impact analysis will identify not just the overall level of improvement but also the sequencing and phasing of this. We're talking 5 about a ten, fifteen, twenty year project until we have ultimate build out. That sequencing will need to be approved by Pima County and by the Town of Marana. Only then will we be able to proceed through the project, if we've met that sequencing. It will be reviewed as we put in subsequent individual subdivision plats. Improvements will be built over time to meet the impact and demand that they have. We are working on a lot of other development issues on this project. We do not have a hard and fast design for how this will take place, what they have is an initial concept. Mayor ltonea: Mayor Honea referred to a memorandum from Dave After to Jerry Flannery dated November 26, 1996, which states that using the IT trip rates, the forecast daily trips are notably higher than in the report. Frank Thompson: There was a meeting with Town staff concerning the initial traffic analysis that was submitted. We had used IT trip rates that were typical of a number of projects that we did in Pima County. The IT trips rates are really a range based upon different land use. We have collected numbers from that range based upon previous projects. Dave Atler: An addendum was delivered to our consultants Friday of last week and it was not reviewed over the weekend. The numbers were checked and they have gone up to over 21,000. Frank Thompson: The total trips is 21,440, but again part of those trips will be internal trips within the site. One of the things that is important to do is work with Town staff concerning the overall sub- area planning that is going on now. He believes that where it stands now, based on the revised addendum that staff is in agreement based on the numbers that projected for our land uses. Mayor Honea: What fire district is this in. Frank Thompson: Northwest Fire District. Mayor Honea: Has there been consultation with them. Frank Thompson: They have consulted with them, there is a letter from them in the file. Mayor Honea: There is also a letter in the file stating that Tucson Water has been designated by the State of Arizona for this area. Is the developer very clear that the Town of Marana will be the water provider. Frank Thompson: They are crystal clear that the Town of Marana will be the water provider. It is there intent to build the water system and to turn it over to the Town. One of the requirements and conditions of zoning that is heartily agreed with is to do a water master plan to the satisfaction of the Town. Some of the surrounding neighbors will also be able to have water provided to them, they are now on wells. Sherry Millner: How many homes are to an acre in the Happy Acres area. Jerry Flannery: He believed it is one residence per acre north of this area in Happy Acres. Sherry Millner: And the surrounding areas. Jerry Flannery: The surrounding areas, there is not a lot of residential. Sherry Millner: So it will be going from one home per acre in that whole area to four or more per acre. Jerry Fiannery: Essentially yes. The overall average will be 3.9 but in some areas it will be upwards of six. Frank Thompson: We have tried to gauge the traffic away from surrounding areas. The Happy Acre area is one that the developer has try to avoid with the traffic. What is trying to be done and it can 6 be seen on the illustration, the meter ulterior which is a four lane ulterior with bike lanes, pedestrian paths, medians, goes through the center of the project would terminate east of the Happy Acres area. This would continue on north and tie into Twin Peaks Road. The intent is to have that traffic go away and not focus on Happy Acres. We believe also by virtue of providing this alternate access that even the manufactured home traffic would gravitate towards this better road and that is the intent. Sherry Millner: She has a concern with this. We are going from a rural area and we're going to build another community out there with houses that are trapped in there like sardines. She would like to see it to where there wasn't four to six houses per acre. All of Marana is going to end up looking like Phoenix. She likes the rural look in Marana. Bobby Sutton, Jr.: The neighbors in Happy Acres, the issues they had were they concerning density or appeal factor of manufactured housing. Frank Thompson: Both of those issues were raised by the neighbors. The one that came out loud and clear a number of times was the nature of the manufactured housing. There was a question raised about density and the density was lowered in response to that. In terms of density and land use, four houses per acre is significantly less than is typically seen. Tom Clark: How quickly can the effluent be on line where it can be used on the golf course. Frank Thompson: It is their intent to start almost immediately with the golf course, because of the need to get it planted this year. Initially we will use ground and irrigation water that we already have in place. There are a number of immediate actions that we would see done together. One would be the development of the water system and the other would be the development of the sewer system. There's two things that are going to happen with the development of the sewer system. We are going to have a lift station and a force main that goes down Lambert Lane and connects into the Continental Ranch site. Sharon Price: There's seems to be about an equal amount of letters from people in the neighborhood for and against the project. Jerry Flannery: What is in the packet is what staff has received in response m this project. Herb Kai: He has a question concerning the spine road that departs the property towards the north end of the Tucson Mountains. Portland Cement already has a traveled route there, would the intention be to use part of that road. Frank Thompson: It is not their intent to use the Portland Cement Road for any reason for any purpose. It is their intent to keep it as a viable road for Portland to use for their purposes. It is a fight and difficult area to go through. It is not our intent to come up with anything that will compromise the road for Arizona Portland Cement. It is not our intent to compromise any safety issues. Herb Kai: Could some of the traffic possibly be routed to the eastern side of the quarry development to the west side and come out on Airline Road. Frank Thompson: That is certainly possible. Steve Hirseh: He is a real estate attorney who has been advising Arizona Portland Cement in connection with the discussions that Mr. Thompson has been referring to. The plant has been some what silent on this issue. They have attempted to work with the developers to see what would come to pass. He is here to report that as opposed to having letters or thick reports in the file that we are not in a position to present to Council a letter that staff required as a recondition of this zoning ordinance being passed. He wanted to explain the reason why and where they are and underscore their willingness to continue working with the developer. A lot of the concerns that the Council Members have raised are also deep concerns of the plant. They look first and foremost at their neighbors in the Town of Marana. 7 Craig Allison, Arizona Portland Cement: Early this week Mr. After received a copy of a letter from the Pima County Department of Transportation. He is wondering if that letter was distributed to the Council Members. Dave Atler: The letter was just received this morning. Craig Allison: He passed out copies of this letter to the Council Members. Many of our concerns are reiterated in the letter from the County to the developer. This is a copy of the plan that was submitted to Portland Cement about a month ago. The continuing concern is the proximity of intersection to their proposed road with the quarry road. Typically in this type of situation you have at least 135 feet separating two roadways of this type. What that does is that avoids conflicts with left turning movement from the various roadway approaches from conflicting with the other turning movements from the other roadways. It's important to keep a separation so people can gauge their traffic movement accordingly. Drainage will be affected by this improvement to some extent and it is our position that should be addressed in a more detailed manner at this point. Mayor Honea: The large quarry trucks are not going to be making left or right turns correct. Craig Allison: That is correct. Mayor Honea: They strictly cross Avra Valley Road straight across. Craig Allison: Their concern would be that people driving on Avra Valley Road would mistake the quarry road for the private development. They may actually turn onto that roadway because of the proximity of the two roads. Mayor Honea: He can understand a little lit of the intersection problems but he doesn't understand the parallel problem. Craig Allison: The proximity of the intersections would be a point of confusion. That is why it is a typical standard of agencies to require an offset in the range of 125 to 150 feet, the County requires 135 feet. He doesn't believe that the Portland Cement Plant's position is that the road cannot exist parallel to the alignment of the quarry road. The intersection in particular is a geometric concern. Mayor Honea: That 60 foot right-of-way that is parallel there, has that already been purchased by the applicant. How are they able to build the roadway at all, does that right-of-way belong to Arizona Portland Cement. Steve Hirseh: Yes that is Arizona Portland Cement property. Mayor Honea: Did Arizona Portland Cement give or sell them the right-of-way to build that roadway. Steve Hirsch: No, not yet. We've been involved in negotiations over right-of-way or sale of the property. Mayor Honea: It was his understanding that there was a letter of understanding or something that Portland Cement would sell a sixty foot right-of-way or grant a sixty foot right-of-way through that property for that roadway. Steve Hirsch: There is no such letter to his knowledge. Tom Clark: Does the map take into consideration when Avra Valley Road is going to be moved to accommodate the new bridge that's going to cross the Santa Cruz River. Steve Hirsch: He doesn't know. Herb Kai: It looks to him like the old alignment. The new alignment will be further northwest. 8 Frank Thompson: The map does reflect the new alignment as proposed in the new plans that Pima County has. We've got kind of a classic dilemma between planners and engineers who look at quarry road which has 2100 trips. Remember though it's 2100 trips a year, 10 to 15 trips maximum a day. That makes it a very different animal. The drawing that was given to Pima County that had a parallel road next to it, has a parallel road with a wall separating the two roads. It looks at treating quarry road more like what it really is, that's a private access drive. It's never going to be a road that carries 10,000 to 15,000 cars a day. We believe that this issue is resolvable to everyone's satisfaction. In fact the condition of part of the rezoning says we don't get a plat approved unless this issue is resolved. We do not have a letter from Arizona Porftand Cement at this point, what we have is discussions with them and continued discussions with them. We believe that we will be able to come to an agreement that is satisfactory to them. We do believe it is going to take considerable hard engineering design efforts, we are prepared to do that. We are also prepared for any condition that the Council might wish to impose that states that is the case. Ora Harn: She is looking at a letter from Pima County that says all these details can be resolved and then she sees a letter that says, no, these issues can't be resolved. Then somebody comes up at the last minute and talks about the road, she was told the road issue was settled. Why was this not resolved before it came to Council. She has been sitting here for 45 minutes and hearing only half of what people have to say. This issue needs to be resolved, she doesn't see any sense in Council sitting there talking about this issue unless it is resolved. She would like to say that Mr. Flannery, Mr. After and Mr. Thompson need to get together and resolve these issues and bring it back in front of the Council. She doesn't want to hear anymore. Mayor Honea: He was led to believe that an agreement had been reached with Arizona Portland Cement on the right-of-way to Avra Valley Road. He thinks that is one of the primary necessities for this project. Dave Atler: His had the same understanding that the Mayor had. That the Town would have a letter in hand with an agreement with Arizona Portland Cement the following week. They were not able to secure that agreement. Jerry Flannery: The last letter in Council's packet dated is December 9, 1996. Under #2, Traffic, it talks about a letter from Arizona Portland Cement being forwarded under a separate cover as well as mentioning that the property is owned by Arizona Portland Cement. We have not received that letter and he understands that there are negotiations going on. Sharon Price: This project is really not ready to go. A motion was made by Ora Harn, seconded by Sharon Price and carried unanimously to continue this issue and that it not be brought before Council again until the problems have been resolved. G. Resolution No. 96-111 and Ordinance No. 96.46; RedHawk Specific Plan - Presented by the Planning Center on behalf of RedHawk Marana L.L.C. a request for consideration and approval of an amendment to the Tortolita Mountain Properties Specific Plan to amend portions of the existing designations within the Specific Plan and to extend and include the Ruelas Canyon Property (1,343 acres} and the B~iada Property 12t347 acres). This entire amendment shall be named RedHawk Specific Plan, The property is l~enerally located in the vicinity of Tangerine Road and RedHawk Boulevard in portions of all Township 11 Southt Range 12 East~ Sections 13-17~ 21-26 and 35 and Township 11 Southt Ranger 13 East~ Sections 7~ 8, 18 and 19. The applicant representing RedHawk on this proiect is The Planning Center~ 4-50 W. Pasco Redondo~ Suite 202t Tucsont AZ 85701. Hurvie Davis: This is a request to amend the RedHawk Specific Plan, to take in an additional 1,343 acres. We had a Public Hearing at the last meeting on December 3, 1996 on this issue. Council requested to continue this item so that staff would have time to work with the developer on some issues that were still unresolved. The staff report and recommendation Items #1 and #2 primarily deal with those issues. We have come to an agreement with staff and the developer as to how to 9 1996 address these items. The ordinance before Council this evening is an appropriate mechanism for addressing these issues. Jerry Flannery: The main things that have occurred since the last meeting, the Items that Council has received in Ordinance 96.46 address basically several requirements that staff would like to see. This Ordinance eliminates the design standards for the streets for the mountain side areas for estate lots. This also provides for two elementary school sites over a period from 2005 to 2015. Those sites can be occupied by schools within that time flame and over the phasing of the project. It eliminates horses being permitted in the canyon area in this project. It provides for parks and recreation easements that have been stipulated by the Pima Count Parks and Recreation office. The agreement has been signed. The developer will pay for a traffic study that amounts to $15,420.00, that study will detail the improvements that might be necessary as time evolves. The developer will transfer water and sewer to the Town when required and when necessary. The developer has also agreed to allocate money from hotels and golf courses, tax money that is generated from those two uses to construct off side road construction. This figure amounts to about $11 million in the next two decades. Mayor Honea: In the previous development plans with RedHawk, Westinghouse, Cottonwood Properties, there have been several different things. Half of the sales tax collected from the resort/golf courses on site were going to be reimbursed to the developer for on site infrastructure improvements. That has changed. Now there will be no reimbursement to the developer for on site improvements and that 1/2% will be used for off site improvements. This is a substantial change and a benefit to the Town and Community. He thinks that is the biggest change in all of the things that were read by Mr. Flannery. Hurvie Davis: The numbers that have been given, between now and the year 2011 the half of the sales tax that otherwise would be rebated to the developer for on site improvements will go to off site improvements that will be identified through the traffic study that will be done. Dan ltochuli: The first pre-annexation development agreement related to this property was in August of 1988. There have been a number of development agreements and amendments to those agreements adopted over the years. Essentially as the Mayor indicated there are provisions for sales tax rebates to the developer from hotel and related industry for on site infrastructure. The matter that is presented to the Council tonight is the amendment to the Specific Plan. The amendment to the Specific Plan does not modify the development agreements. The Town has an ordinance that provides for Public Hearing and Planning Commission review and Council action on development agreement amendments that take more time than we can deal with tonight. We have prepared the amendments that we want in the development agreements, the amendments are actually prepared and they are signed by the developer. The developer has agreed that although infrastructure improvements are necessary in the project, the developer will pay for all those infrastructure improvements. But everyone's acknowledged there's going to be infrastructure improvements off the proper(y that are going to be more regional improvements that are going to be necessary. We have agreed that there will be a traffic analysis performed, the developer will share in the cost of that study. And then that half of the sales tax revenue for the next ten years will go into regional improvements. They can be used one of two ways. They can be used by the Town, we can spend that money directly ourselves. Or if the developer would like to front the cost of that, they can build the improvements itself and then be reimbursed by the Town on an annual basis from certain sales tax revenues. Specifically the sales tax revenues generated from hotel, resort and time share rental rates, food and beverage and certain golf courses associated with those facilities If the Specific Plan amendment is granted then we will be bringing back to the Mayor and Council the three development agreement modifications which will go to Public Hearing before the Planning Commission and then will come before the Council. This sales tax change will apply to the entire RedHawk Specific Plan area, except for what the lawyers refer to as district one. The real estate people refer to that area as Heritage Highland. The reason that that is not included in the sales tax rebate plan is the sales tax rebate applies to hotels and resorts, there's not any zoning for those in there. Billy Madden, 7400 N. Juniper Rd.: She is concerned about the canyons and pushing back close to the canyons. Also she is concerned with the roads, she does not want to be stuck doing the County roads. Ted Sehlinkert, 5072 W, Condor Dr.: His main concern is that the development as he sees it would have a substantial impact on the County roadway system that is already inadequate for the development that exists on this side of Town. He also has a concern that somebody has to pay for the impact to the County roadways. He appreciates the developer's willingness to make concessions to the order of $11.8 million for roadways in Marana. But he has a concern with the roadways outside of Marana. he is here on behalf of northwest residents to ask Council to postpone consideration of any amendments or further development in the RedHawk area until such time as a general usage plan for the area could be worked out. Anne Carl, 1225 E. Lester Tucson, AZ: She can understand the pressure the Council is under with the developers, it makes it hard to keep things in perspective. This whole thing is about limits and drawing the line. This is not going to be the final special privilege this developer is going to ask for, this is just the beginning. Curtis Bradley, 2345 E. 6th St., Tucson, AZ: He is here to voice his concerns on this issue. He has enjoyed hiking and bird watching in Pim.a County for many years. He feels that this proposed amendment will have a negative impact on the Tortolita Mountains and the surrounding community. Jennifer Katcher, 2345 E. 6th St., Tucson, AZ: She is here presenting herself as a hiker and a bird watcher. She wanted to bring up the issue of the ironwood trees in the area. The area proposed for development is one of the largest areas of ironwood trees in the state. These trees are habitat to many birds. She wants the Council to carefully consider the impact that this project is going to have, because they are permanent. Andra Ewton, 3220 E. Glenn St., Tucson, AZ: She is a concerned citizen of Pima County, she has a degree in environmental planning and a strong belief in the preservation of the natural world. The development of this area would compromise the ecological integrity of the Tortolita Mountains, this must not be allowed to happen. Ora Harn: Council Member Harn appreciates that these young people have come out and expressed their feelings. She realizes that it is some very beautiful country in the RedHawk area. She wants to make sure that these people have taken the time to look at the Specific Plan and learn what is really going to go on out there. If she's not mistaken at this time there is not one person that has moved into a house on the east side of 1-10 through rezoning. We haven't OK'd any Specific Plan so far where there are people actually living there. Hurvie Davis: That is basically correct with the exception to the U.S. Home/ Heritage Highland project. To his knowledge he does not recall the Town issuing a building permit on the east side of the freeway. Ora Harn: Up to this point the problems that exist there have not been a problem created by the Town of Marana. All of us are very concerned that what we are planning to do will have adequate transportation facilities for people to use. Hopefully with the agreements that are being made these problems will be resolved. She understand there is a lot of misinformation about this project. She would like to ask the young people at the meeting tonight to spend a little bit of time to see what is really happening there and get good information. Jerry Flannery: There are about twenty four or twenty five permits that were issued in the Heritage Highlands area, nobody is living there yet. When we sat down and talked to the developers in this case we realized that we wanted to come to a good medium. If you look at the staff report 31% of this site is reserved for open space, 1720 acres. That encourages clustering and the least amount of impact to native vegetation and wildlife. We've tried to involve the Game and Fish Department is this process very early. We've also involved the Pima County Parks and Recreation Department, there are several conditions involved in that that the developer has agreed to. We feel comfortable with what the developer has come up with. David Mehl, Cottonwood Properties: For a developer to have a successful project they need to preserve the desert, We cannot be successful unless this is a terrific place where people want to live. We have worked very closely with Game and Fish and with the Pima County Parks and Recreation Department. We have agreed to g/ye Pima County trailheads, both temporary and then ultimately a future permanent trailhead that we will donate to the County, That railhead will be the main access into the Park from the south side of the mountains, He thinks it is fair to say that the County was extremely pleased with the results of these discussions that were held. We are pleased at how well we were able to work with them. In addition with Game and Fish we have hired biologists to do studies and to do things that Game and Fish wanted done. We have completed a study on the entire 5,600 acres, which took a lot of time and significant resources. That study showed that there is no evidence of pygmy owls any where on the 5,600 acres. This is a spectacular development that we can be proud of as developers. That our customers, people who want to live out there will be proud of and want to live there. And also that the Town can be very proud of. A motion was made by Ora Harn, seconded by Tom Clark and carried 6 to 1, with Herb Kai voting Nay to approve Resolution No. 96-111 and Ordinance No. 96.46, for the amendment to the Tortotita Mountain Properties Specific Plan to amend portions of the existing designations within the Specific Plan and to extend and include the Ruelas Canyon Property (1,343 acres) and the Bajada Property {2,347 acres). H. Southern Arizona Waste Rights Settlement Act Effluent Utilization Study - Prepared bl, the United States Bureau of Reclamation and the Pima County' Wastewater Management Department. Council Member Herb Kal left the dais. Hut'vie Davis: This study was presented to the Town, some months ago we had a draft of the report. The final report has been presented to the Town. We thought it was appropriate to bring this matter to the Council and to give a little overview of what the study has indicated. We have outlined the recommended alternatives that have been identified. Mr. Atler is familiar with the project as well as others here this evening. Dave Atler: The study came out with six alternatives. Mr. Atler went over these alternatives. The alternative that they feel would be the least feasible would be the in channel recharge. The City of Tucson would identify how much water was getting recharged that is in the river. It would be allowed half the total credits, 14,100 acre feet of credits because it is a non-constructed project. The City of Tucson prefers the in channel recharge versus a constructed project. The next item up is agricultural use which is irrigation of agricultural lands primarily in the northern part of the County. The report identities that the agricultural use would use more than the 28,200 acre feet. However Mr. DeSpain has informed Mr. After that they could use substantially less than that because the effluent could effectively seal the upper portion of the soil. His understanding in meeting with Miss. Chavez a couple weeks ago is that there is a more recent draft that we have not received, where the agricultural use is actually identified as a tie with the number 2 alternative. The #3 alternative is the sand and gravel operations. The report identifies approximately 2,500 acre feet would be feasible for use. They would give up more but the sand and gravel operations would only be able to use that 2,500 acre feet. They would use it on the screening and washing operations that they have on their sites. The report also states that they wouldn't be doing any ground water pumping. His concern on that one is whether or not they could actually use the effluent for washing because there are a number of specifications for clean rock and other construction materials. The effluent may not get it to the level that it needs to be cleaned. The ground water pumping, depending on the site of the mining operation, may require that they pump the area in order to draw the water table down so they don't have water in the pit itself. #2 option is recharge the lower Santa Cruz River, it appears from that in the report that that recharge would he done in spreading basins and it would be done down stream from the Sanders Road alignment. Sherry Millner: Is this proposal at Cortaro similar to the one south of Ina Road. Dave Atler: It would create the same type of enpondment area because it's now damming the ~vater up, so you could envision it being of the same sort. The recommendation that staff is making, based on the apparent conflict between the Tohono O'odham Nation and the City of Tucson and the concern that staff has and concerns that the Council has, we are recommending that Council request in turn that the Bureau of Reclamation hold a public hearing where these issues could be further discussed, that is stated in the motion, Mayor Honea: He is a little concerned about the holding areas and things almost directly contiguous to Continental Ranch. One thing with free flow effluent, you don't have the mosquitoes and a lot of the problems that you have. If we start ponding water directly contiguous to Continental Ranch for recharge, the stench is probably going to be a problem. If they had free flow, where the water would interchange and follow back out into the channel or something of that nature. There could be some serious problems with holding the water. He will have Kathy Chavez address Council's issues on this study. Afterwards he will make some comments pertaining to effluent and his thoughts on it. Kathy Chavez: The reason that this study was initiated is because there is 28,200 acre feet of effluent that is reserved for the Tohono O'Odham Nation. Since 1982 that water has flowed down the river, no one has made plans to use that effluent. Pima County has been a strong proponent of putting effluent to use. We would like to see if we could put this effluent to some use. With that we initiated an IGA with the Bureau of Reclamation and looked at many alternatives. There were other alternatives that were looked at that were eliminated from further consideration due to various constraints. The draft that was issued in September of 1996 is a final draft. Both of these drafts are still open for comments. If the Town of Marana has comments they would like to see addressed in this report, if they are important enough we would be willing to include them in the final report. She would need to get back to the Bureau of Reclamation and let them know the Town has some concerns. She also wanted to mention that the report envisions that any of these alternatives or a combination of alternatives could also be implemented. So in other words some alternatives may be easier and faster to implement while the other ones are being constructed. The concept of recharging in the Cortaro area is a concept, we developed it as a concept with the idea that we were looking for public input. With respect to Council Member Millner's concern, the inflatable dam to be envisioned would be four feet high. In terms of flooding issues it would be able to be deflated if there was a flood event. With respect to the mosquito problem, we would envision that it could be operated as a wet dry cycle. We would put the inflatable dam up, let water recharge and then after it's recharged a while let the dam down and let the effluent come down and seep into the ground and dry up. She wanted to mention the benefits of doing these type of projects are #1, it captures the effluent and recharges it in an area that's within the basin. Some of the immediate effects would be to increase some of the ground water levels in that area. Also the other things we were looking for is to capture that effluent and put it in an area where then it could be taken up and reused, hopefully for some recreational opportunities. We are looking for comments from the Council on this proposal. Sherry Mtilner: The mosquito population has doubled in the Ina Road area. Hurvie Davis: Just down stream from the Ina Road bridge we've had the sand and gravel operation in there since before it was annexed into the Town. With the repair of the Ina Road bridge there was a drop structure put in for the Ina Road bridge. He went down and looked at it, that appears to be what is causing the water to be ponding up. Dave Atler: The County has been trying to modify the area south of the bridge so it doesn't pond as much. Tucson and the Town of Marana need to discuss this because they do control the largest share of the effluent. Hugh Holub: He agrees with having a Public Hearing. We should get into some broader issues like where does the effluent come from. It's coming from the water that we're going to be providing developments. 13 A motion was made by Bobby Sutton, Jr., seconded by Sharon Price and carried unanimously to send a formal, written letter to the Bureau of Reclamation requesting a Public Hearing to discuss the Effluent Utilization Study. I. Staff recommendations for 1997 Pima County Bond Election. Hurvie Davis: We do have a copy of the Pima County Bond recommendation, a total of $556 million, $346 million in revenue bonds and $210 million in general obligation bonds. Staff came up with a list that we thought we would provide to the Town Council for a request to include those projects in the upcoming bond election. We feel there are needs in the Town that staff would recommend that the Council approve this list. We have recommended to Council a total cost of $41,600,000.00 in bond projects, Dave Atler: Last week he received a report that went to the Board of Supervisors, dated December 4, 1996. There is hopefully a typo for the Marana Interceptor, the original package showed $2,456,000.00 for the interceptor. The package that went to the Board of Supervisor's shows $50,000.00. A motion was made by Bobby Sutton, Jr., seconded by Tom Clark and carried unanimously to direct staff to draft a letter to the Pima County Citizens Bond Advisory Committee requesting the above mentioned projects be included in the Pima County Bond Election of 1997. J. Political Signs - Discussion of Section 16-11-4. Political Signs of the Town's Sign Code. Hurvie Davis: This issue was brought before Council on November 20, 1996. We have had discussion on it and it is before Council again this evening with a recommendation. Jerry Flannery: If the changes as specified on November 20, 1996 are adequate and we have reflected that direction from Council, staff would request that the Council direct staff to amend the Sign Code appropriately. A motion was made by Bobby Sutton, Jr., seconded by Ora Ham and carried unanimously to direct staff to pursue a sign code amendment for political signs in the Town of Marana as recommended by staff, (and as modified by the Council) and that this matter be scheduled before the Planning Commission. K. Greater Tucson Economic Council - Proposed 1997 Legislative Agenda. Hurvie Davis: This is GTEC's proposed le~/slative agenda for 1997. Staff would recommend that Council support the Agenda. Jocelyn Entz: The presentation of these items is going to be on January 22, 1997. We are requesting that as many Council Members as possible attend to present the legislative proposal. Mayor Honea: There was a consensus of support from the Council Members on these issues. L. Pima Association of Governments Agenda - Review and direction. Hurvie Davis: Tomorrow will be a great day in the metropolitan area for leadership, vision and cooperation. We have the PAG Regional Council meeting tomorrow, the agenda is here this evening for Council to review. M. Mayor and Council's Report. Mayor Honea: He asked for and had a meeting with Cottonwood Properties and Best Properties shortly after the last Council meeting. He instructed both companies to make sure they had everything in line and ready to go when they got to the Council meeting this evening. He also met with the general manager 98 FM radio, they would like to do some public service for the Town of Marana. Sherry Millner: She wanted to say she attended the other half of her leadership class at the U of A for policies in Town government. She learned a lot, especially on negotiations. She would recommend this class to all Council Members. Ora Harn: She attended the dedication of the flags at the Chamber of Commerce. We need to try to honor our young people who are striving. There are lots of good things that young people are doing and we need to encourage that. Ann Parrish, Town Clerk, Town of Sahuarita: She wanted to thank the Marana Town Council and the staff for helping Sahuarita. They have been incorporated now for two years. The wanted to take the opportunity to invite the Town to an open house from 1:00 to 4:40, everyone is invited. They have a brand new town hall they have moved into at the 1-19 and Helmet Peak Road. N. Manager's Report Hurvie Davis: Mr. Davis met with officials from SportsPark regarding expansion. There's also been some discussion with them as well as Supervisor Boyd of the possibility of turning that park over to the Town, it's the County's at the present time. We continue to have meetings with Pima County and property owners on the levee easement for the Santa Cruz River. We are back on track and making some progress on those easements. As he said to the Planning Commission back at their meeting in November, and based on his conversations and direction from several Council Members this evening, from now on when these issues come up and they are not resolved by 5:00 p.m. on the day that it is required, the train leaves the station. If the material and the developer are not ready they wait, unless he is directed by Council otherwise. Mayor Honea: The County is thinking about turning the SportsPark over to the Town of Marana. Hurvie Davis: This is correct. Mayor Hones: We would be the lease holder. Hurvie Davis: Yes. Mr. Davis wished everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Tom Clark: Has the report been received from the Police Department reference the graffiti. Hurvie Davis: Chief Smith did distribute that to Council about a week ago. X. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS None XI. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Bobby Sutton, Jr., seconded by Sharon Price and carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 11:03 p.m. AUDIO TAPES OF THE MEETING ARE AVAILABLE AT THE MARANA TOWN HALL CLERK'S OFFICE, CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are the true and correct minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of the Marana Town Council held on December 17, 1996. I further certify that a quorum was present. / / /