Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994.0627.TCJWSM.Minutes TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS tkir MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORK/STUDY SESSION OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 27, 1994 A joint public meeting of the Fountain Hills Town Council and the Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission was convened and called to order at 6:30 pm, Monday, June 27, 1994, in the Fountain Hills Town Hall Council Chambers, located at 16836 E. Palisades Blvd., Building C,Fountain Hills, Arizona. Present at the meeting were the following members of the Planning and Zoning Commission: Chairman Bob Thomas;Vice Chairman Sam Cioffi;Commissioners James Fonk,Tom Henry,Bruce Hansen,Karen Myers,and Jon Klesner. Present from the Town Council were the following: Mayor John Cutillo, Vice Mayor Wally Hudson, Councilmembers Bill O'Brien,Frank Clark,Marianne Wiggishoff,Peg Tibbetts,and Don Lawrence. Also present were: Town Manager Paul Nordin, Town Attorney Bill Farrell,Community Development Director Gary Jeppson, and Town Clerk Cassie Hansen. AGENDA ITEM#2.-REVIEW OF ROLE/FUNCTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PER TOWN CODE AND STATE LAW. Mr.Farrell said the town did not have the capacity to require amenities from a developer over which the town had no control, i.e., sewer, water, school facilities. He said P&Z could not deny plans based on these concerns. Commissioner Myers said it was important for the Commission to be informed about issues,whether or not they had jurisdiction over them or not. Mr. Farrell agreed but said only areas within the town's jurisdiction could be compelled to give information. Information could be requested from other town agencies but not demanded. He said Planning & Zoning could only do their jobs as set forth for them to do, relying on other agencies and departments to do the same. Mr.Nordin said staff was concerned with the P&Z Commission not necessarily denying plans,but tabling issues for concerns that appeared to be out of their control. Chairman Thomas responded that on occasion, the Commission had acted on behalf of the best interests of the Town, only to be informed by Mr. Farrell later than they were not acting appropriately. Councilman Clark said if the Town or Town Council was made aware of a problem, an attempt was made to alert the appropriate agency and request resolution,but not to take on the problem themselves. AGENDA ITEM#3.-DISCUSSION OF THE"PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(PUD)ORDINANCE" - ITS HISTORY, PRESENT USE, PROPOSED FUTURE USES, PROCEDURE TO AMEND, ETC. Mr. Jeppson presented a map showing PUD's issued within the Town and the differentials from the base zoning. Mr.Thomas said he had trouble discussing PUD's without also discussing density transfers and lot size minimums (Agenda Items 4 & 5) at the same time and Mayor Cutillo agreed that could be done. Minutes of the Joint Work/Study Session of the Town Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission June 27, 1994 Page 1 of 4.' AGENDA ITEM #4. - DISCUSSION OF "DENSITY TRANSFER POLICY" - SHOULD A POLICY BE FORMALLY ADOPTED; WHERE SHOULD DENSITY TRANSFERS BE ALLOWED; HOW MUCH "TRANSFER" SHOULD BE PERMITTED, ETC. AGENDA ITEM #5. - DISCUSSION OF "LOT SIZE MINIMUMS" - ARE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS TOO BIG,TOO SMALL,JUST RIGHT; SHOULD THE PUD ORDINANCE BE USED TO ALLOW LESS THAN 6,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS TO BE PLATTED. Mr. Jeppson then said the P&Z Commission wanted to establish criteria for a P.U.D. He said staff had been very flexible and the Zoning Ordinance did not establish such criteria. Discussions began centered on a memo he had prepared for the Council(attached as part of the Council packet)incorporating P&Z Commission Chairman Thomas' suggested P.U.D. regulations. Mr. Farrell said he favored a P.U.D. from a legal standpoint but said the standards needed to be spelled out in writing. Councilwoman Tibbetts said she favored the flexibility of a P.U.D.,but desired a 6,000 square-foot minimum limit on lot size. Councilman O'Brien wondered if there might be cause to also limit a project's size, i.e., if the lots were less than 6,000 square foot lots, limit the number of lots allowed. Mayor Cutillo suggested discussing each item being revised and striving to reach a consensus. There was a consensus on the first two items, (A and B), of Mr. Jeppson's memo. After much discussion on Item C,Mayor Cutillo and Chairman Thomas agreed that they could eliminate the 1,100 square foot open space requirement. Other suggestions included changing the 1,100 square foot requirement to a `41111) percentage of the overall development and/or, for smaller developments, possibly charging a fee in lieu of land requirement. It was agreed that staff would take all of the suggestions and attempt a rewrite,bringing it back before the Council at a later date. Discussions advanced to Item D. It was agreed that the 80% minimum lot size was enough of a restriction and that a 6,000 square foot lot limit would not be specified. There was a consensus on Items D2-D6 Discussions finished with concept plans and precise plans (preliminary plats) and who had the final approval over each. Councilman Clark said he would favor formal guidelines. It was also agreed to not allow a lot size less than 6,000 square feet other than through an 80% PUD reduction. AGENDA ITEM #6. - DISCUSSION OF "LAND DISTURBANCE ALLOWANCE (10' CUT AND FILL LIMITATION)AND PROCEDURE FOR GRANTING WAIVERS"-SHOULD ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES BE ADOPTED AS MINIMUM CONDITIONS FOR A WAIVER TO BE GRANTED; SHOULD THE PROCEDURE ITSELF BE CHANGED. Councilwoman Tibbetts wondered if the ten foot limitation was reasonable and how it had been established. Councilman Clark said there should be allowances in excess due to the non-standard topography,especially where the cut and fill would ultimately not even be visible. There was some discussions on the waiver process and Mr. Farrell explained the intent of the process. Discussions followed on whether the intent was for Council to grant a Minutes of the Joint Work/Study Session of the Town Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission June 27, 1994 .1) Page 2 of 4.' waiver,or to grant the applicant the right to seek a waiver after preliminary plat approval. It was explained that the N1r✓ Council would be granting waiver approval,but the P&Z Commission could deny the preliminary plat for any other non-conformance reasons. A good deal of discussion followed concerning the equity of the cut and fill regulations for a developer who would bring his case before the Council versus an individual homeowner who would bring his case before the Board of Adjustment. The discussions returned to the present cut and fill waiver ordinance. Mr.Nordin suggested writing a procedure first and then going back and looking at the ordinance and making whatever adjustments were deemed appropriate after determining the best way to implement the process, though the waiver would still need Council approval prior to preliminary plat approval. AGENDA ITEM#7. - IMPACT FEES FOR FOUNTAIN HILLS. Mr.Farrell said there was a case just heard before the Supreme Court that would,most likely,have a marked effect on impact fees in Arizona and how they could be assessed. Mr.Farrell explained that impact fees were limited to services provided by the Town and were imposed/collected at the time a residential building permit was issued. Councilman O'Brien said he had requested the item be discussed since budget discussions were well underway and the Council needed to be aware of the full cost of increasing the platted land. He said he wasn't so concerned with controlling the rate of development as he was with recouping the expense to the Town of the accelerated development. Vice Mayor Hudson pointed out that a sales tax allowed the Town to decide how the revenue would be spent,where impact fees were regulated by state law. Mr.Nordin confirmed that there were significant advantages with a sales tax over a development fee. Mr.Farrell recommended waiting for the results of the Supreme Court case and the Legislature's response when they reconvened in January 1995 since the current state statute could feasibly be amended at that time. It was decided to postpone Agenda Item#8 and Item#'s 10-15 until a later meeting due to the lateness of the hour. AGENDA ITEM #9. - DISCUSSION OF TOWN COUNCIL EXPECTATIONS FOR COMMISSION CONDUCT TOWARDS THE PUBLIC, APPLICANTS, TOWN STAFF, AND THE COUNCIL. Mayor Cutillo said he had been displeased with the actions of several P&Z Commissioners and felt their actions had been uncalled for. He said he would like to have some attitudes changed and everyone work together rather than in opposition. Councilman Lawrence said it was expected that disagreements would occur from time to time,but if everyone could conduct themselves in a professional manner, things should be able to proceed in a reasonable manner. Councilman O'Brien said a consensus should be strived for,but to expect one to be reached wasn't always realistic. Councilman Clark said that a Commission/Council meeting was not the place for public personal attacks. Minutes of the Joint Work/Study Session of the Town Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission L . June 27, 1994 Page 3 of 4.' AGENDA ITEM#16. - ADJOURNMENT. Mayor Cutillo adjourned the joint meeting at approximately 10:10 pm. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS By: Jo u ' o, Mayor ATTEST: Cassie B. Hansen, Town Clerk PREPARED BY: Rosalynn cker, Administrative dissistant CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Joint Work/Study Session of the Fountain Hills Town Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission held on the 27th day of June, 1994. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 1st day of September, 1994. 04A4A /3• 104-11A-4-A--) Cassie B. Hansen, Town Clerk Minutes of the Joint Work/Study Session of the Town Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission June 27, 1994 .1) Page 4 of 4.'