HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/09/2017 Study Session Meeting Minutes -4d
AN NOW
MARANAA
ESTABLISHED 1977
MARANA TOWN COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION MEETING MINUTES
11555 W. Civic Center Drive, Marana,', Arizona 85653
Council, Chambers, May 9, 2017, at or after 6:00 PM
Ed Honea, Mayor
Jon Post, Vice Mayor
David Bowen, Council Member
Patti Comerford, Council Member
Herb Kai., Council Member
Carol McGorray, Council Member
Roxanne Ziegler, Council Member
STUDY SESSION
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL. Mayor Honea called the meeting to order at 6:01
p.m. Town Clerk Bronson called roll. All Council Members were present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE. Led by Mayor
Honea.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA. Motion to approve by Council Member McGorray, second by
Council Member I(aL Passed unanimously.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
DISCUSSION/DIRECTION/POSSIBLE ACTION
DI Relating to Development; preview, discussion and direction regarding The Villages of
Tortolita Development, including an overview of the approved development concept and
discussion of transportation infrastructure requirements and sequencing (Ryan Mahoney).
Mr. Mahoney began with some details regarding the specific, plan of the property which was
approved in 2007. There has been no development since then, although 6,500 units are allowed
as well as some commercial and industrial development on the 1,780-acre property. There are a
number of land use designations allowed, including medium to low density residential, medium
May 9,2017 Study Session Minutes I
density residential, medium-high density residential, nixed use and industrial use. The nixed
use district for medium-high and medium density also allows for commercial as well as a nixed
commercial use residential. There is one area of industrial which allows for retail and
commercial uses but is limited to 45% of the floor area.
The development is composed of five different villages which includes the industrial part.
Village 2 has the most intense development. The Tortolita Mountain Parkway that bisects the
development will be the main thoroughfare. of note within this plan is a 200-foot buffer that:
exists along the right of way for the train which buffers train noise and vibration, but also exists
as a linear parkway. Mr. Mahoney also provided an exhibit of a land use summary showing the
distribution of units within the villages. village I at the north has about 1,500 dwelling units.
Village 2 has about 2,000 units; village 3 has about 1,300 units, and village 4 has about 1,600
a
dwelling units.
Gilbert Davidson then gave an overview of the developments and traffic circulation issues
pertaining to the east side of the interstate. one of the conditions approved by the Council when
this property was zoned was that the developers had to build a new interchange before one home
could be built. That was negotiated and done in a different time and in a different economy,
With.the current economy in perspective, staff and developers began to think of ways to solve a
number of different community challenges while still supporting the developer and housing
production. The team looked for ways to change that condition, which was to build a full
interchange. In the new scenario, that condition would be exchanged for constructing a
connection from San Lucas/Adonis Road to Tangerine Road to create a secondary access which
we have wanted for some time and also solves the project's need to have a secondary access.
The second element is that the Marana interchange needs to be upgraded because it is old and
wasn't designed for the development currently going on. The interchange is owned by the state,
by A.DOT, and by the Federal Highways Administration, but as residents we are concerned about
how it functions for a safer, more efficient interchange. we would need to work. with ADOT
with respect to merging on and off ramps and making improvements to add capacity. ]Doing
those two things would enable the developer to begin construction and also solve community
needs. The town recommendation would be that the 100% condition on the developer's
responsibility be reduced to 50%, and the town would reimburse them. 50% using impact fees
over time. If the Council were to implement this, we would not add this project to our impact
fees for transportation until we know that they are going to actually build the interchange. The
developer would front the money for the interchange on a pay back situation from the town over
time, That is the only modification being requested by the developer, and it has a broad positive
public impact. Because it is a zoning change, this will have to go back through the Planning
Corrimission and then to Council. Time is of the essence because we want to see the road built
and development started with The villages of Tortolita. However, this is not an action item
tonight.
Vice Mayor Fast asked about the time line. Mrs Davidson indicated the sooner the better. Staff
will add a clause in the development agreement that if the Adonis Load isn't completed within a
year, all bets are off other than if something conies up that the developer cannot control such as
finding a major archeological find. we want the road in place and operational as quickly as
possible. Staff would recommend that once the TI improvements are started, they could
probably go ahead with housing production. If they have an agreement with ADOT, AIDC T
May 9,2017 Study Session Minutes 2
won't let them stop an interchange project. Council Member Kai stated that along with the
transportation circulation, we have a drainage issue with sheet flow coming off of the Tortolita
Fan. He asked if the town would do a study to determine how we would dispose of the water to
the west of the interstate. Mr. Davidson responded that this is one of the items in the town's
budget— a comprehensive drainage plan for north Marana. That will be the kick off to looking at
the big picture of our drainage issues, we do have some challenges corning from the Bows out
of the `-fortolita Fan and how it intersects with the railroad, the interstate, culverts and the
downstream property owners. Council Member Kai asked if it is anticipated to have the
drainage done by the time the first house is built. Mr. Davidson responded that the developer
has the responsibility to deal with drainage. The passthrough is the bigger issue to address.
D2 Relating to Public works; a presentation on possible alignments for the extension of
Adonis Road east of Interstate 10 from the terminus of Grier Road to Tangerine Road (Keith
B rano) .
Mr. Brann continued with.the previous presentation on the alignment of the road. Staff has
been working on the project for some time, and there have been issues with access on the east
side of the interstate. when development stalled during the recession we realized we wouldn't
have a secondary access in a suitable time frame. There is informal access through owl Head out
to Missile Base Road, but it is an unpaved and not well-maintained state land roadway. with the
lacy of secondary access we have been trying to get an extension of Adonis for San Lucas. we
have tried to deal with the railroad but they are not interested in creating more at-grade crossings,
and we lack the funds for a grade separated interchange at this time. Although Adonis Road
which is the working name for the parallel road on the east side of I-10 runs through San Lucas.,
in the previous presentation it was listed as Tortolita Boulevard, and in Mandarina's specific
plan, they show it as Mandarina Boulevard. our desire would be to have a single name that
doesn't benefit one maj or development over another.
The town does have an active capital improvement project for Adonis Road for this current year
where we have a consultant who is preparing an ALTA (American Land Title Association) title
study. After the ALTA study, they will lay the alignment that is chosen.with legal descriptions
for us to approach the developers for dedication of right of way. In the past, all the major
developers were approached for dedications, and we received affirmations to that effect. Since
that time, the Mandarina development has withdrawn, but they are willing to work with us if
their preferred alignment is chosen.
In 2007, Council passed a resolution to relocate the Tangerine interchange. That carried through
into the 2010 general .flan circulation element. About that same time almost all developers in
play wanted to move forward. The town tried to create a more suitable engineering design of
what is expected of this alignment. This alignment followed several inflection points and
attempted to come up with the proper design speed for a 45--MITI four-lane roadway. Those
inflection points included the right of way already in existence on the plat from La Mirage which
was never built, a location for a half mile signal off of a future Moore Road interchange, and a
property corner that was agreed upon by the Tortolita Shadows development and the Mandarina
development at the time. And Mandarina had supplied an alignment while they were designing
the Tangerine interchange in conjunction with westcor to hit a half mile signal location for
Tangerine, and then there was going to be another signal at a quarter mile. Following the 2007
resolution and the General Plan, we have the exhibits from the various specific plans—
May 9,2017 Study Session Minutes 3
Mandarina and Tortolita Shadows—that take into account the alignment that we had all worked
on together, Tortolita Shadows was approved by the Council in 2012. Mandarina had been
approved in 2009, Then the recession happens and no one has the money to build a relocated
Tangerine Road interchange, although we had development wanting to move ahead at the
existing 'Tangerine T1. We worked with all the developers at that point. Not everyone was
happy, but we did move forward by removing the relocated Tangerine interchange from our
General Plan as a 2015 minor plan amendment. We then modified the drawing we had done in
2009, keeping as many of the inflection points as we could. We have continued to discuss the
current alignment with all major developers along that corridor. We have three alignments now
that are in play. Most of them are very similar but begin to depart as we get closer to the
Mandarina development,
Option I is an alignment proposed by Mandarina s developers, and is a drastic departure from
previous alignments in that the parallel arterial does not hit the middle of the property and there
is less commercial and multi-use residential to the north. The modified alignment moves the
inflection point which was the previously agreed upon by the property corner and modifies
Mandarina s development and Tortolita Shadows, They have dropped the arterial adjacent to
their drainage buffer and the railroad, showing the entire area as being residential and also a
multi-lane roundabout fully connected to their property. This would be the first multi-lane
roundabout in our jurisdiction. The shifted alignment also causes a shift in the zoning. Staff
analysis indicates this would require a single loaded arterial roadway where there would be no
need for access. Their alignment as depleted does not allow access to the adjacent Tangerine
Investment Partners property which we see as an issue. However, in support of this alignment,
Mandarina has agreed to dedicate the right of way for this alignment which is a significant
amount of the Adonis extension corridor.
Option 2 is an alignment between what Mandarina desires and what is currently on the books
with the inflection point at the property corner with the arterial centered in the property with the
same tangent as in the specific plan. This also shows a multi-lane roundabout in more or less the
same location with a slight shift away from the interstate. We think the zoning changes would be
minor relative to mixed use and commercial. This might be something within the authority of
the Planning Director to modify the specific plan, and then there would be no modification to the
specific plan of Tortolita Shadows. It would have a double loaded arterial roadway providing
equal service to both properties.
Option 3 has the least amount of modifications and is close to the alignment from 2015 after
modifications to the General Plan. This allows for a fully signalized intersection or a
multi-lane roundabout, and staff thinks the zoning changes are adaptable. Of note is that the
intersection is fully within the Tangerine Investment Partners property and that a slip left turn
lane would be allowed into the Mandarina property in addition to them having access to the
arterial and to get to the signal. Tangerine Investment Partners has indicated that under this
alignment, they are willing to dedicate the necessary right of way to their property.
Mr. Brann then went into more detail about multi-lane roundabouts and how it could or would
work inthis situation.
The Mayor then called on speakers. Jeff Blilie, representing the Mandarina project., provided an
Adonis Road Alignment Argument sheet, He voiced Mandarina's concerns over the change in
May 9,2017 Study Session Minutes 4
the alignment, stating that he believes option I is best for then and for Tortolita Shadows. They
(Mandarina) are in favor of the roundabout as a good option. He further noted that town staff
has not approached Mandarina about donating to the right of way since he's been involved.
However, if option I is selected, they are willing to donate the right of way. Vice Mayor Posh:
raised his concerns, mainly about the lack of commercial along the interstate in option I.
Freeway commercial is appealing to him. Mr. Blilie indicated that no matter how much
commercial is zoned, it will never build out if you don't have full access in and out, and what is
actually shown in option I might be too much. He again emphasized that without the
interchange, everything is drastically changed. Council Member McGorray asked if
Mandarina would consider dropping their lawsuit if Council approved option 1. Mr. Blilie
responded that they were very willing to work with Marana on a settlement, and this is one of the
issues they would throw into that mix. Chad Rodriguez, also representing Mandarina, echoed
the remarks of Mr. Blilie and emphasized that the town's modifications do not work for their
project, especially in the retail world of today, Retail does move forward with rooftops. Council
Member Comerford asked for clarification on who is paying for the road through the project,
Mr. Brann affirmed that Tortolita Shadows (sic) Villages, is paying for the road through their
project. They have offered to pay for the Adonis extension for a secondary, access, but only as a
strip- paved, interim road to provide access. As Mandarina or Tortolita Shadows develop, they
would have to reconstruct that road to the full four lanes. Although Mandarina has offered to pay
for the right of way in their preferred alignment, they are not ready to move forward with their
development. Council Member Kai asked about the proximity of the preferred Mandarina
alignment to the railroad. Mr. Brann responded that it is just under a quarter mile which is
within the parameters of what the town would allow for a signalized intersection. The
roundabout shown is in the goo-foot range. The typical touchdown point for a flyover is 800-
I,000 feet. All of the alignments could support a future interchange with some modifications.
The signalized location is the best chance of having no impact from a grade change.
Katherine Temple, a resident of San )Lucas, spoke asking that the Council consider, when
planning any of the realignment escape routes, the effects of a hazardous materials spill on the
rail line or near the Marana interchange. Neil Simon, an owner of Venture west, the managing
partner of Tangerine Investment Partners, noted that when the property was acquired prior to the
great:recession, they envisioned that the property might host something similar to Innovation
Park in oro Valley because of the proximity to the interstate. I�e believes that options I and 2
with the roundabouts would cast a significant cloud on the potential development of that
property. John Kai spoke on behalf of pro-business and more business opportunities. l�e noted
that Tangerine Load is a major state highway through Marana. He is not in favor of the
roundabout, and he also suggested another alignment along the Central .Arizona]Project canal to
further mitigate potential problems from a chemical spill near the railroad and interstate. Paul
Oland with wLB Group and also with Mr. Simon, agreed with Mr. Brann that there are some
design challenges getting over the railroad. He also noted that option I does create some
awkwardness for commercial use. He referenced the Twin Peaks signal as a good template to
follow. Further, he noted that a roundabout probably isn't ideal even if it meets all the
specifications. And Tangerine Investment Partners also bought their property in anticipation of
the relocated Tangerine interchange; it wasn't just Mandarina relying on that. But they are
willing to dedicate right of way and possible cost-sharing on the signal, which he believes is the
right thing to do. Perhaps there is a way not to bisect:the Mandarina property and still preserve
the commercial corner without sacrificing design.
May 9,2017 Study Session Minutes 5
Council Member Bowen asked Mr. Blilie about the major arterial proposed that runs along the
interstate. Mr,, Blilie responded that from a traditional planning standpoint, having the major
arterial on-the periphery of a residential community is ideal. You don't want large four and six
lane arterials through the middle of residential development, Council Member Bowen stated
that was exactly what is in Continental Ranch and it works just fine, and that is a 700-acre parcel.
I-le also understands that property along the interstate is less desirable for housing. Council
Member Bowen asked if the Mandarina property was bisected, would they have to create a
buffer where the road is before there are houses because of its proximity to the railroad, more or
less staying with the alignment in Option 3. Mr. Blilie responded that without additional buffer,
the property would be less marketable. What they are planning now is about a 200-foot regional
drainage channel that's 200 or 300 feet wide, so there is some buffer coming off the railroad
tracks, so with the road, provides an additional 150 feet of buffer. It's a marketability issue.
They are trying to figure out a way to make the Mandarina project get developable without that
interchange they were looking at initially. From a home builder's standpoint, they would rather
see is a 300-acre parcel with an arterial road on the periphery rather than through the middle of
the parcel. Going back to the Tortolita Shadows two-lane chip seal road, that will be more
expensive for Mandar'na because they will have to rip that out and engineer a new road,
I
Vice Mayor Post stated that he likes Option 2 or Option 3 and asked staff if Council needed to
make a motion. or just give direction. Mr. Davidson responded that at some point staff will have
to have direction but the Council doesn't have to vote tonight. It would be nice to get direction
because there is a lot of work to be done. Vice Mayor Post stated that he wanted a signal light,
but also that he felt more discussion was needed with some of the property owners about paying
for this; he believes there's a little more that can be done so that the Villages or the Town don't
have to foot the entire bill on this because there are others here who will benefit greatly. Saying
that we want a signal light gives some parameters to work within. Mr. Davidson stated that
there is the possibility of morphing Option I and 3 to begin to balance out some of the different
developer interests or needs. He said that if Council wants a signal light on Tangerine, that will
absolutely dictate at some point where that's going to have to go. Vice Mayor Post moved that
the best route has a.signal light. Council Member Ziegler seconded the motion. Before a vote
was taken, Mayor Honea stated that the only option that qualifies is Option 3. Council
Member Ziegler asked for clarification which was provided by Mr. Brann who stated that if the
Council is not comfortable with allowing a multi-lane roundabout, then they are precluding only
the location of the intersection of Tangerine Boulevard, There is still an opportunity to keep
working with the developments for alignment as it runs through the Mandarina property. We
already have the Tortolita Shadows development that is willing to accommodate the shift in
alignment on their property, so we know that property could be worked out. If the town
continues to work with Mandarina on an alignment, we can continue to do that. We just have to
move forward understanding that ultimately the intersection location is not going to land in the
Mandarina property. Vice Mayor Post inteJected that he does not like the road next to the
railroad. That requires zoning changes that he is not prepared to make tonight. If Council is
asked to choose a route, he does not like Option I because of what that implies. He wants a
signal but lie also wants flexibility for staff to talk to property owners that will benefit from the
signal light and hopefully kick in some funding because it ups the price of this project.
Vice Mayor Post moved to direct the town toward Option 2 or Option 3 depending oil the best
locationfor the signal light and continue discussions with the other property owners in that
May 9,2017 Study Session Minutes 6
area. Second by Council Member Ziegler. Motion passed 5-2, )w1h (."Wincil.41-ember
Mc array and Mayor Honea volhia nay.
Council Member Ziegler ,s cited that she did not like the option along the interstate either. She
continued regarding the lawsuit by Mr. Palkowitsch at which time Mr. Cassidy interjected,
recommending that there be no further discussion of the lawsuit as he had added an executive
session to this agenda to address that issue if Council desired.
EXECUTIVE SESSIONS
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03, the Town Council may vote to go into executive session, which
will not be open to the public, to discuss certain matters.
El Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03 (A)(3), Council may ask for discussion
or consultation for legal advice with the Town Attorney concerning any matter listed on this
agenda.
E2 Executive session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431,03(A)(4) for discussion or consultation
with the Town's attorneys regarding pending litigation in Mandarina, LLC v. Town of Marana,
Pima County Superior Court Case No, C20161982.
Ft?TtJRE AGENDA ITEMS
Notwithstanding the mayor's discretion regarding the items to be placed on the agenda, if three
or more Council members request that an item be placed on the agenda, it must be placed on the
agenda for the second regular Town Council meeting after the date of the request, pursuant to
Marana Town Code Section 2-4-2(B).
ADJOURNMEW-1-1. Motion to adjourn at 7:22 p.m. by Vice Mayor Post, second by Council
Member Bojven. 11assed unaniniously.
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the study
session/presentation of the Marana.Town Council meeting held on May 9, 2017. 1 further certify
that a quorum was present.
o6celyn (L . ronson, Town Clerk
MA MA A7
FSTA BLISHE'D 1977
May 9,2017 Study Session MinUtes