HomeMy WebLinkAbout110317P
NOTICE OF THE
EXECUTIVE AND REGULAR SESSIONS OF
THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL
TIME: 5:30 P.M. - EXECUTIVE SESSION
(Executive Session will be held in the Fountain Conference Room - 2nd floor)
6:30 P.M. - REGULAR SESSION
WHEN: THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 2011
WHERE: FOUNTAIN HILLS COUNCIL CHAMBERS
16705 E. AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS, FOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ
Councilmembers of the Town of Fountain Hills will attend either in person or by telephone conference call;
a quorum of the Town’s various Commissions or Boards may be in attendance at the Council meeting.
PROCEDURE FOR ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL
Anyone wishing to speak before the Council must fill out a speaker’s card and submit it to the
Town Clerk prior to Council discussion of that Agenda item. Speaker Cards are located in
the Council Chamber Lobby and near the Clerk’s position on the dais.
Speakers will be called in the order in which the speaker cards were received either by the Clerk
or the Mayor. At that time, speakers should stand and approach the podium. Speakers are
asked to state their name prior to commenting and to direct their comments to the Presiding
Officer and not to individual Councilmembers. Speakers’ statements should not be
repetitive. If a speaker chooses not to speak when called, the speaker will be deemed to have
waived his or her opportunity to speak on the matter. Speakers may not (i) reserve a portion
of their time for a later time or (ii) transfer any portion of their time to another speaker.
If there is a Public Hearing, please submit the speaker card to speak to that issue during
the Public Hearing.
Individual speakers will be allowed three contiguous minutes to address the Council. Time
limits may be waived by (i) discretion of the Town Manager upon request by the speaker not
less than 24 hours prior to a Meeting, (ii) consensus of the Council at Meeting or (iii) the
Mayor either prior to or during a Meeting. Please be respectful when making your
comments. If you do not comply with these rules, you will be asked to leave.
Mayor Jay T. Schlum
Councilmember Dennis Brown Councilmember Tait D. Elkie
Vice Mayor Dennis Contino Councilmember Cassie Hansen
Councilmember Ginny Dickey Councilmember Henry Leger
Z:\Council Packets\2011\R3-17-11\110317A.docx Last printed 3/10/2011 4:49 PM Page 2 of 3
EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER – Mayor Jay T. Schlum
1.) ROLL CALL AND VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pursuant to §38-
431.03(A)(7), discussions or consultations with designated representatives of the public body
in order to consider its position and instruct its representatives regarding negotiations for the
purchase, sales or lease of real property (Specifically, a possible property exchange).
2.) ADJOURNMENT.
REGULAR SESSION AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Jay T. Schlum
INVOCATION – Pastor Gary Emmons, Christ’s Church of Fountain Hills
ROLL CALL – Mayor Jay T. Schlum
MAYOR’S REPORT
i) None.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS
i) The Mayor will read a Proclamation declaring April 2011 “Volunteer Month.”
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431-01(G), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters not listed on the agenda. Any
such comment (i) must be within the jurisdiction of the Council and (ii) is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner
restrictions. The Council will not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during “Call to the Public” unless the
matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action. At the conclusion of the call to the public, individual
Councilmembers may (i) respond to criticism, (ii) ask staff to review a matter or (iii) ask that the matter be placed on a
future Council agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. CONSIDERATION of approving the TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES from
February 8 and March 3, 2011.
2. CONSIDERATION approving RESOLUTION 2011-11, abandoning whatever right, title, or
interest the Town has in the certain public utility and drainage easements located at the
southerly and easterly property line of Plat 603-A, Block 2, Lot 1 (15202 E. Lotus Lane) as
recorded in Book 196 of Maps, Page 28, Records of Maricopa County, Arizona. (EA11-01
Ragozzino)
3. CONSIDERATION of a SPECIAL EVENT APPLICATION for the MOVIE IN THE PARK
sponsored by the Town of Fountain Hills to be held April 2, 2011, in Fountain Park. Saguaro
Boulevard will be closed from Avenue of the Fountain to Palisades Boulevard.
Z:\Council Packets\2011\R3-17-11\110317A.docx Last printed 3/10/2011 4:49 PM Page 3 of 3
REGULAR AGENDA
4. CONSIDERATION of APPOINTING one (1) citizen to serve on the Public Safety Advisory
Commission for the remainder of a two (2) year term, beginning March 17, 201 1, and ending
December 31, 2012.
5. CONSIDERATION of RESOLUTION 2011-10, approving a SECOND AMENDMENT to
the Development Agreement with Pacific FH Resort, LLC.
6. CONSIDERATION of APPROVING PAYMENT to Tyler Technologies for past due annual
software maintenance contract in the amount of $60,000 for FY 09/10 and FY 10/11.
7. CONSIDERATION of AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATION from the
contingency expenditure line item within the Town Manager Division, Administration
Department of the General Fund budget to the Community Services Departments maintenance
line items in the amount of $26,278, to repair Town recreation facilities.
8. CONSIDERATION of AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATION from the
contingency expenditure line item within the Town Manager Division, Administration
Department of the General Fund budget to the Development Services Department facilities
maintenance line item in the amount of $32,200 to repair Civic Center mechanical equipment.
9. DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF relating
to the February 17, 2011, agenda item DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER to prepare the
appropriate written notification documentation terminating the representation of the law firm
of Gust Rosenfeld, P.L.C. for town attorney services, which was continued to the Work Study
Session, held on March 8, 2011, at which no action was taken. The discussion may include,
but is not limited to, the recent Arizona Attorney General’s report dated February 1, 2011.
10. DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION relating to review of all
aspects of TOWN LEGAL SERVICES and POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES.
11. COUNCIL DISCUSSION/DIRECTION to the Town Manager.
Items listed below are related only to the propriety of (i) placing such items on a future agenda
for action or (ii) directing staff to conduct further research and report back to the Council:
A. None.
12. SUMMARY of COUNCIL REQUESTS and REPORT ON RECENT ACTIVITIES by the
Town Manager.
13. ADJOURN the Regular Session.
DATED this 10th day of March 2011.
Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk
The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 480 -816-5100
(voice) or 1-800-367-8939 (TDD) 48 hours prior to the meeting to request a reasonable accommodation to participate in this meeting or
to obtain agenda information in large print format. Supporting documentation and staff reports furnished the Council with this agenda
are available for review in the Clerk’s office.
NOTICE OF THE
EXECUTIVE AND REGULAR SESSIONS OF
THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL
TIME: 5:30 P.M. - EXECUTIVE SESSION
(Executive Session will be held in the Fountain Conference Room - 2nd floor)
6:30 P.M. - REGULAR SESSION
WHEN: THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 2011
WHERE: FOUNTAIN HILLS COUNCIL CHAMBERS
16705 E. AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS, FOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ
Councilmembers of the Town of Fountain Hills will attend either in person or by telephone conference call;
a quorum of the Town’s various Commissions or Boards may be in attendance at the Council meeting.
PROCEDURE FOR ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL
Anyone wishing to speak before the Council must fill out a speaker’s card and submit it to the
Town Clerk prior to Council discussion of that Agenda item. Speaker Cards are located in
the Council Chamber Lobby and near the Clerk’s position on the dais.
Speakers will be called in the order in which the speaker cards were received either by the Clerk
or the Mayor. At that time, speakers should stand and approach the podium. Speakers are
asked to state their name prior to commenting and to direct their comments to the Presiding
Officer and not to individual Councilmembers. Speakers’ statements should not be
repetitive. If a speaker chooses not to speak when called, the speaker will be deemed to have
waived his or her opportunity to speak on the matter. Speakers may not (i) reserve a portion
of their time for a later time or (ii) transfer any portion of their time to another speaker.
If there is a Public Hearing, please submit the speaker card to speak to that issue during
the Public Hearing.
Individual speakers will be allowed three contiguous minutes to address the Council. Time
limits may be waived by (i) discretion of the Town Manager upon request by the speaker not
less than 24 hours prior to a Meeting, (ii) consensus of the Council at Meeting or (iii) the
Mayor either prior to or during a Meeting. Please be respectful when making your
comments. If you do not comply with these rules, you will be asked to leave.
Mayor Jay T. Schlum
Councilmember Dennis Brown Councilmember Tait D. Elkie
Vice Mayor Dennis Contino Councilmember Cassie Hansen
Councilmember Ginny Dickey Councilmember Henry Leger
Z:\Council Packets\2011\R3-17-11\110317A.docx Last printed 3/10/2011 4:49 PM Page 2 of 3
EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER – Mayor Jay T. Schlum
1.) ROLL CALL AND VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pursuant to §38-
431.03(A)(7), discussions or consultations with designated representatives of the public body
in order to consider its position and instruct its representatives regarding negotiations for the
purchase, sales or lease of real property (Specifically, a possible property exchange).
2.) ADJOURNMENT.
REGULAR SESSION AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Jay T. Schlum
INVOCATION – Pastor Gary Emmons, Christ’s Church of Fountain Hills
ROLL CALL – Mayor Jay T. Schlum
MAYOR’S REPORT
i) None.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS
i) The Mayor will read a Proclamation declaring April 2011 “Volunteer Month.”
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431-01(G), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters not listed on the agenda. Any
such comment (i) must be within the jurisdiction of the Council and (ii) is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner
restrictions. The Council will not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during “Call to the Public” unless the
matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action. At the conclusion of the call to the public, individual
Councilmembers may (i) respond to criticism, (ii) ask staff to review a matter or (iii) ask that the matter be placed on a
future Council agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. CONSIDERATION of approving the TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES from
February 8 and March 3, 2011.
2. CONSIDERATION approving RESOLUTION 2011-11, abandoning whatever right, title, or
interest the Town has in the certain public utility and drainage easements located at the
southerly and easterly property line of Plat 603-A, Block 2, Lot 1 (15202 E. Lotus Lane) as
recorded in Book 196 of Maps, Page 28, Records of Maricopa County, Arizona. (EA11-01
Ragozzino)
3. CONSIDERATION of a SPECIAL EVENT APPLICATION for the MOVIE IN THE PARK
sponsored by the Town of Fountain Hills to be held April 2, 2011, in Fountain Park. Saguaro
Boulevard will be closed from Avenue of the Fountain to Palisades Boulevard.
Z:\Council Packets\2011\R3-17-11\110317A.docx Last printed 3/10/2011 4:49 PM Page 3 of 3
REGULAR AGENDA
4. CONSIDERATION of APPOINTING one (1) citizen to serve on the Public Safety Advisory
Commission for the remainder of a two (2) year term, beginning March 17, 2011, and ending
December 31, 2012.
5. CONSIDERATION of RESOLUTION 2011-10, approving a SECOND AMENDMENT to
the Development Agreement with Pacific FH Resort, LLC.
6. CONSIDERATION of APPROVING PAYMENT to Tyler Technologies for past due annual
software maintenance contract in the amount of $60,000 for FY 09/10 and FY 10/11.
7. CONSIDERATION of AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATION from the
contingency expenditure line item within the Town Manager Division, Administration
Department of the General Fund budget to the Community Services Departments maintenance
line items in the amount of $26,278, to repair Town recreation facilities.
8. CONSIDERATION of AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATION from the
contingency expenditure line item within the Town Manager Division, Administration
Department of the General Fund budget to the Development Services Department facilities
maintenance line item in the amount of $32,200 to repair Civic Center mechanical equipment.
9. DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF relating
to the February 17, 2011, agenda item DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER to prepare the
appropriate written notification documentation terminating the representation of the law firm
of Gust Rosenfeld, P.L.C. for town attorney services, which was continued to the Work Study
Session, held on March 8, 2011, at which no action was taken. The discussion may include,
but is not limited to, the recent Arizona Attorney General’s report dated February 1, 2011.
10. DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION relating to review of all
aspects of TOWN LEGAL SERVICES and POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES.
11. COUNCIL DISCUSSION/DIRECTION to the Town Manager.
Items listed below are related only to the propriety of (i) placing such items on a future agenda
for action or (ii) directing staff to conduct further research and report back to the Council:
A. None.
12. SUMMARY of COUNCIL REQUESTS and REPORT ON RECENT ACTIVITIES by the
Town Manager.
13. ADJOURN the Regular Session.
DATED this 10th day of March 2011.
Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk
The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 480-816-5100
(voice) or 1-800-367-8939 (TDD) 48 hours prior to the meeting to request a reasonable accommodation to participate in this meeting or
to obtain agenda information in large print format. Supporting documentation and staff reports furnished the Council with this agenda
are available for review in the Clerk’s office.
1413301.1
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, APPROVING A SECOND AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH PACIFIC FH RESORT, LLC.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
FOUNTAIN HILLS as follows:
SECTION 1. The Second Amendment to Development Agreement (Fountain Hills
Resort) by and between Pacific FH Resort, LLC, as successor in interest to FH Resort
Developers L.L.C., and the Town of Fountain Hills (the “Second Amendment”) is hereby
approved in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2. The Mayor, the Town Manager, the Town Clerk and the Town Attorney
are hereby authorized and directed to cause the execution of the Second Amendment and to take
all steps necessary to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills,
March 17, 2011.
FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO:
Jay T. Schlum, Mayor Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk
REVIEWED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Richard L. Davis, Town Manager Andrew J. McGuire, Town Attorney
1413301.1
EXHIBIT A
TO
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-10
[Second Amendment to Development Agreement Fountain Hills Resort]
See following pages.
1080894.8
SECOND AMENDMENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Fountain Hills Resort)
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this “Second
Amendment”) is made as of February 17, 2011 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the Town of
Fountain Hills, an Arizona municipal corporation (the “Town”) and Pacific FH Resort, LLC, an
Arizona limited liability company (“Pacific FH”), as successor in interest to FH Resort Developers,
L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability company (“FH Resort”). The Town and Pacific FH are referred
to herein individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”
RECITALS
A. The Town and Fountain Vista Properties, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company
(“Fountain Vista”), are Parties to that certain Development Agreement dated March 3, 2003 and
recorded at Document Number 2003-0365140 in the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office (the
“Original Development Agreement”), as amended by that First Amendment to Development
Agreement dated June 7, 2007, by and between the Town and Fountain Vista’s successor-in-interest,
FH Resort (“FH Resort”), which was authorized by the Town Council by Resolution No. 2007-04
and recorded at Document Number 2007-0699965 in the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office (the
“First Amendment”). The Original Development Agreement and the First Amendment are
hereinafter referred to together as the “Development Agreement.”
B. The Development Agreement governs the development of the property legally
described on Exhibit 1A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”).
C. Pacific FH has succeeded to the interest of FH Resort in and to the Property as well as
its interest in the Development Agreement pursuant to that certain Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale by and
between FH Resort, as Trustor, and Pacific Coach, Inc., an Arizona corporation (“Pacific Coach”),
as Grantee, dated October 29, 2008 and recorded at Document Number 2008-0935968 in the
Maricopa County Recorder’s Office and that certain Special Warranty Deed dated October 29, 2008
by and between Pacific Coach, as Grantor, and Pacific FH, as Grantee, and recorded at Document
Number 2008-1042953 in the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office, true and correct copies of which
documents are attached hereto as Exhibit 2A and incorporated herein by this reference. All
references to the “Owner” in the Development Agreement hereinafter refer to Pacific FH.
D. The Town and Pacific FH desire to amend certain portions of the Development
Agreement on the terms and conditions set forth below.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, the promises and covenants
set forth below, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged by the Parties, the Town and Pacific FH agree to amend the Development
Agreement as follows:
1080894.8 2
1. R-4 Zoning Designation. The phrase “eliminating all R-4 zoning category uses from
the Property” in Recital E of the First Amendment shall be deleted and replaced with the phrase
“eliminating the R-4 zoning designation for the Property.”
2. Commencement of Construction Deadline. Section 10 of the Development
Agreement is hereby amended to provide that the Owner shall commence construction with respect
to the Resort as soon as market conditions permit and market demand supports such construction,
but in no event later than the date that is five (5) years following the Effective Date of this Second
Amendment.
3. Roadway Improvements; Traffic Signal. The Town and Owner agree that the
Owner’s obligations to (a) complete any off-site roadway improvements and utility improvements
and (b) install a traffic signal at the location shown on Exhibit 3 to the First Amendment at a time
and in a manner acceptable to the Town Engineer, shall be required to be completed not earlier than
the date on which the first permit is issued for construction on the Property.
4. Architectural Approvals. Section 12 of the First Amendment is hereby deleted in its
entirety and replaced with the architectural requirements set forth in this Section 4. In addition to
the requirements of Chapter 19 of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance and as soon as practicable
following approval of this Second Amendment, the Owner shall submit to the Town for its approval
such elevation drawings and architectural renderings deemed desirable by the Town, showing all of
the building design characteristics for the Resort, including but not limited to, colors, architectural
treatments and details, building massing and composition, building orientation, signage,
monumentation, and surface treatments for exposed retaining walls.
5. Parking Requirements. The Parties hereby acknowledge and agree that pursuant to
the findings set forth in that certain Fountain Hills Conference Resort and Spa Parking Evaluation
dated October 2006, which is attached hereto as Exhibit 3A and incorporated herein by reference
(the “Parking Evaluation”), a total of 665 parking spaces will be required and will be sufficient to
meet the parking requirements for the Property if developed as approved in the site plan for the
Resort dated April 6, 2007 (the “Approved Site Plan”). The Parties specifically agree and
understand that, in the event the Approved Site Plan is modified in any way that will affect parking
requirements, the Parking Evaluation shall be updated to address any such changes. Upon
completion of the updated Parking Evaluation, the Town Council shall determine, in its sole
discretion, whether additional parking may be required. If the Town Council determines that such
additional parking is required, such amended requirements shall become a condition of approval of
the Resort as if fully set forth in this Second Amendment.
6. Effect of Amendment. Except as otherwise contained herein, the remaining terms
and provisions of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and are otherwise
hereby ratified and confirmed. All capitalized terms used in this Second Amendment shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in the Development Agreement unless otherwise indicated herein. In the
event of any conflict between the terms and conditions of this Second Amendment and the terms and
conditions of the Development Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Second Amendment
shall control, unless a contrary interpretation is required by a particular situation or circumstance.
1080894.8 3
7. Entitlements. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in the Development
Agreement, in consideration of the substantial expenditures by the Owner and in consideration of the
substantial sales, hotel bed and board taxes to be generated from the Property from the construction
of the Resort and the subsequent operation of the Resort on the Property, the Town shall not initiate
a rezoning of the Property for a period of five (5) years from the Effective Date of this Second
Amendment provided that Owner, its successors and assigns, are not in breach of the Development
Agreement and so long as they have not violated the terms and conditions of the Approvals.
Entitlements granted by ordinance # 07-06, PD2005-3, and SU 2005-5 shall remain in full force and
effect for the entire time period in which this Second Amendment is effective.
8. Non-Default. By executing this Second Amendment, Pacific FH, on behalf of itself
and in its role as successor to FH Resorts and as Owner of the Property, affirmatively asserts that the
Town is not currently in default, nor has been in default at any time prior to this Second
Amendment, under any of the terms or conditions of the Development Agreement.
9. Counterparts. This Second Amendment may be executed in any number of
counterparts, all of which together shall be deemed to constitute one instrument, and each of which
shall be deemed an original. In addition, the Parties acknowledge and agree that facsimile signatures
shall be deemed valid and binding, and thereafter, upon request of either Party, each Party agrees to
deliver original signed copies of this Amendment to the other Party.
10. Waiver of Claims Pursuant to ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 12-1134 et seq. Pacific FH, on
behalf of itself and all other parties having an interest in the Property, agrees and understands that
the Town is entering into this Second Amendment in good faith and with the understanding that, if it
acts consistently with the terms and conditions herein, it will not be subject to a claim for diminished
value of the Property from Pacific FH or other parties having an interest in the Property. Pacific FH
agrees and consents to all the conditions imposed by the Second Amendment, including all
stipulations adopted by the Town Council, and by signing this Second Amendment hereby waives
any and all claims, suits, damages, compensation and causes of action Pacific FH may have now or
in the future under the provisions of ARIZ. REV. STAT. §§ 12-1134 through and including 12-1136, as
amended (but specifically excluding any provisions included therein relating to eminent domain) and
resulting solely from the development of the Property consistent with this Second Amendment, the
First Amendment and the Original Agreement (including all stipulations adopted by the Town
Council). Pacific FH acknowledges and agrees that the conditions imposed by this Second
Amendment (including all stipulations adopted by the Town Council) or a denial of the Second
Amendment would not result in a reduction of the fair market value of the Property as defined in
ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 12-1136. Pacific FH acknowledges that this Second Amendment may be
adopted with stipulations imposed by the Town Council, in its sole discretion, prior to approval of
the Second Amendment. Pacific FH agrees and understands that its waiver of claims as set forth
herein shall be deemed to extend to cover any changes to the Second Amendment and all
stipulations thereto as approved by the Town Council unless, not later than 48 hours following such
Town Council approvals, Pacific FH notifies the Town, in writing, of its disagreement with such
stipulation(s). In the event that Pacific FH timely notifies the Town of such disagreement, Pacific
FH shall not be deemed to have waived claims with respect to only the stipulations imposed or
revised by the Town Council prior to approval of the Second Amendment; provided, however, that if
Pacific FH does not submit a separate waiver of such claims, in a form acceptable to the Town, prior
1080894.8 4
to close of business on the fifth calendar day following approval of the Second Amendment, then the
Town may, after proper notice and hearing, rescind the resolution adopting the Second Amendment,
and if rescinded by the Town Council acting in its sole discretion, this waiver shall act as a bar to a
claim for diminished value based upon the rescinded Second Amendment. The foregoing waiver of
claims shall not be effective and shall be of no further force and effect with respect to the Second
Amendment in the event the Town Council disapproves the Second Amendment.
11. Conflict of Interest. This Second Amendment may be cancelled pursuant to ARIZ.
REV. STAT. § 38-511.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the day
and year first written above.
“Owner”
PACIFIC FH RESORT, LLC,
an Arizona limited liability company
By:
Name:
Title:
“Town”
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS,
an Arizona municipal corporation
By:
Jay T. Schlum, Mayor
ATTEST:
Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk
1080894.8 5
STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF MARICOPA )
On , 2011, before me, _______________________________, a Notary Public in
and for said State, personally appeared Jay T. Schlum, the Mayor of the Town of Fountain Hills, an
Arizona municipal corporation, for and on behalf of the corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
_________________________________
Notary Public
My commission expires:
___________________
STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF MARICOPA )
On , 2011, before me, _______________________________, a Notary Public in
and for said State, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to
me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the _______________________________ of Pacific
FH Resort, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, and that he, as such officer, being authorized
to do so, executed the foregoing instrument on behalf of the company, for the purposes therein
contained.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
_________________________________
Notary Public
My commission expires:
___________________
1080894.8
EXHIBIT 1A
TO
SECOND AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
[Legal Description of the Property]
Please see following pages.
Wood, Patel & Associates, I1w.
(480) 834-3300
www.woodpalel.com
EXHIBIT!
PARCEL DESCRIPTION
Fouutaln ffilis Resort
Lot 1 aud Tract A
April 25, 2007
WP#052381.01
Page 1
Lot 1 and Tract A of Fountain Hills Resort as shown on the fmal plat recorded in Book 597, page 42,
Maricopa County Records (M.C.R.), lying within Sections 20, 21, 28 and 29, Township 3 North, Range 6
East of the Gila and Salt River Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona.
Containing 59.5852 acres, or 2,595,532 square feet ofland, more or less.
Subject to existing rights-of-way and easements.
TIlls parcel descriptiOn was prepared without the benefit of survey fieldwork and is based on the Final
Plat of Fountain Hills Resort recorded in Book 597, page 42, M.C.R. and other client provided
information. Any monumentation noted in this parcel description is based on said Final Piat.
Y,\Parce! fucripiions\0523BLOJ Founlaro Hi!1l; Resort Lot 1 llud Trn.clA.(loc
Wood, Patel & A.sociates, Inc.
(480) 834-3300
www.woodpatel.com
EXlmUT2
PARCEL DESCRIPTION
FOllntain Hills Resort
Lot 2
April 25, 2007
WP# 052381.01
Page I of2
That portion of Lot 1 of Fonntain Hills Resort as shown on the final plat recorded in Book 597, page 42,
Maricopa County Records (M.C.R.), lying within Sections 20, 21, 28 and 29, Township 3 North, Range 6
East of the Gila and Salt River Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona, more particularly described as
follows:
COMMENCING at the northerly most comer of said Lot I;
THENCE along the northeasterly line of Said Lot I, South 39°25'44" East, a distance of 236.54 feet, to
the POINT OF BEGINNING.
THENCE continuing, South 39°25'44" East, a distance of 803.46, feet to the northeast COmer of said Lot
1;
THENCE leaving said northeasterly line, along the east line of said Lot 1, South 04°00'42" West, a
distance of 425 .00, to the southeast corner of said Lot 1;
THENCE leaving said east line, along the southerly line of said Lot 1, South 71°19'44" West, a distance
of 687.06 feet;
THENCE leaving said southerly line, North 16°36'24" West, a distance of253.13 feet;
THENCE North 73°33'17" East, a distance ofl04.92 feet;
THENCE North 73°23'31" East, a distance of44.33 feet;
THENCE North 74°03'03" East, a distance of20.29 feet;
THENCE North 64°02'47" East, a distance of30.29 feet;
THENCE North 49°38'22" East, a distance of 42.19 feet;
THENCE North 41 °12'33" East, a distance of47.86 feet;
THENCE North 35°29'04" East, a distance of37.33 feet;
THENCE North 34°46'40" East,a distance of22.09 feet;
THENCE North 23°47'58" East, a distance of7.86 feet;
THENCE North 12°56'10" East, a distance of 10.86 feet;
THENCE North 14°53'14" East, a distance ofl4.70 feet;
THENCE North 15°45'33" East, a distance of 54.54 feet;
THENCE North 15°06'10" East, a distanceof73.62 feet;
THENCE North 15°17'09" East, a distance of 86.47 feet;
THENCE North 14°56'35" East, a distance of36.15 feet;
THENCE North 15°49'52" East, a distance of 48.18 feet;
THENCE North 15°42'58" West, a distance of78.80 feet;
THENCE North 15°27'21" West, a distance of65.26 feet;
THENCE North 24°24'24" West, a distance of30.21 feet;
THENCE North 29°39'30" West, a distance of41.96 feet;
Parcel Descriptioll
Fountain Hills Resort
Lot 2
THENCE North 38°59'25" West, a distance of 4828 feet;
THENCE North 46°52'00" West, a distance of 27.42 feet;
THENCE North 54°40'55" West, a distance of 84_82 feet;
THENCE North 52°33'13" West, a distance of 13234 feet;
THENCE North 22°29' 11" East, a distance of 23.20 feet;
April 25, 2007
WP# 052381.01
Page 2 of2
THENCE North 52°22'57" East, a distance of 194.44 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 9.9121 acres, or 431,771 square feet ofland, more or less.
Subject to existiog rights-of-way and easements.
This parcel description was prepared without the benefit of survey fieldwork and is based on file Final
Plat of Fountain Hills Resort recorded in Book 597, page 42, M.C.R. and other client provided
information. Any monumentation noted in this parcel description is based on said Final Plat.
Y;\Parctl Deu:riptions\0523SI.1}1 FouirtainHills Resort LOl2.doc
1080894.8
EXHIBIT 2A
TO
SECOND AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
[Assignment Documents]
Please see following pages.
1080894.8
EXHIBIT 3A
TO
SECOND AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
[Parking Evaluation]
Please see following pages.
Fountain Hills Conference Resort and Spa
Parking
Parking Provide
Resort Parking
Surface
Underground Garage
Total Resort Parking
Penthouse Parking
Penthouse Garages
Surface Parking
Total Penthouse Parking
Total Parking Provided
Parking Needed
Resort Parking
Penthouse Parking
Total Parking needed
138
450
72
8
588
80
668
585
80
665
Prepared far:
Town of Fountain Hills
16705 E. Avenue of the Fountains
Fountain Hills, AZ 85268
Tel : (480) 816 -5138
,
I
, ,
I ,
/ ,
the CK Group, In c.
_ 16448 N. 40th Slreet, Suite A C K Phoen ix, AZ 85032-3337
"roup. Ino . Tel: (602) 482-5884
October 2006
2006-35TE
I
Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa
Pa rking Evalu ation
-:0 ==~'": ::-:.=_ =~~=~~ __ =~.,
Prepared for:
Town of Fountain Hills
16705 E. Avenue of the Fountains
Fountain Hills, AZ 85268
Tel:(480) 816-5138
Prepared by:
Group . Inc.
16448 N . 40th Street, Suite A
Phoenix, Arizona 8503 2-3 33 7
Tel : (602) 482 -5884
October 2006
2006 -35TE
Table of Contents
1 .1 Background ................................................................................................ 1
1 .2 Study Objective ........................................................................................... 1
1 .3 Study Methodology ..................................................................................... 1
.2 DATA COLLECTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Similar Resort Sites ...................................................................................... 4
2.2 Parking Occupancy Surveys ......................................................................... 4
2.3 National Parking Standards ......................................................................... 6
3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 8
3.1 Findings ..................................................................................................... 8
3.2 Recommendations ....................................................................................... 9
APPENDICES
Appendix A Excerpts from Circulation Report
Appendix B Survey Questionnaires
list of Figures
Figure 1 Proposed Site plan .................................................................................... 2
list of Tables
Table 1 Summary of Surveyed Resort Sites ................................................................. 5
Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evaluation
1 INTRODUCTION
This report documents findings of the Parking Evaluation conducted by the CK Group, Inc.
(CK) for the proposed Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa development along Palisades
Boulevard in Fountain Hills, Arizona. CK was retained by the Town of Fountain Hills to
conduct an independent evaluation of the parking requirements for the proposed
development.
1 .1 Background
According to the site pion provided by Group West Companies, LLC, Fountain Hills
Conference Resort & Spa is planned as a resort conference hotel with 233 guest suites,
22,500 square feet of conference space (including 12,500 square feet of meeting space and
10,000 square feet of ballroom space), approximately 6,500 square feet of
restaurant/lounge, and other amenities such as entertainment decks, pools, and gardens.
The resort also includes 36 penthouse units thai would be located in front of the project site.
The site plan also shows a total of 506 on-site parking spaces including 138 surface stalls,
288 garage stalls, 72 penthouse garages, and 8 penthouse surface stalls. A conceptual site
plan for the proposed development is shown in Figure 1 .
Circulation Plan Report prepared earlier by Wood, Patel & Associates, Inc. in October 2005
recommends 474 total parking spaces for the development including 72 for the 36
penthouse units based on shored parking analysis. Excerpts from the Circulation Report are
included in Appendix A. The Town's parking ordinance recommends that the off-street
parking For a mixed-use development should be computed as the sum of parking
requirements for various land uses computed separately, which yields a total parking space
requirement of 870 spaces.
1.2 Study Objective
The primary objective of this study is to conduct an independent evaluation of the parking
requirements for the proposed development and recommend appropriate number of parking
spaces required for the development. The study is intended to assisl the Town in making on
informed decision before approval of the final plans of the development.
1.3 Study Methodology
To fulfill the study objective of providing an independent evaluation of the parking
requirements for the propased development, parking surveys were conducted 01 similar
resort siles in Arizona. Seven (7) resort sites were selected for parking surveys based on their
similarity (guest rooms, conference space, amenities) with the proposed project. While "sold
Fountain & Spa
Parking Evaluation CK
0"<~,,p. tl,,~.
-f'.t /N(II'i'(.~
L18 SltrfiNt MVJ:
~JI Colt~Sufi,
424T.t..,1!M11o
a ....... rwo
1.JFoIItfM,g(#III,..·~
'S..,fo~$I.diJ
itJ:T.u/Su.'6
,
/
,
I
,
/
I
, ,
oI(.frlto(4tAl'-"f on,.,.ttW:J!
.-" .... ~ ,
"JF.I.~ _____ -...-.-/'Om. "-
.-" .
I
I
, ,
-~--------------~------==:§~ .
Source: Group West Companies LLC
Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evaluation
2
H(.1J't.l (i~nTROOMS(2JJ;
':Alir..4nJJ,'G !JO'~ I/U1snG
11f~1Volo'
"-,
e;(Jt3r ROO/ttJ:
FinllmL S_r-.
1liwl'"", ..
(f6) ~50SF~
""J 5"'S"·s.J.~
(lPJ $SfJ$F ,w..,
fWl1lOSFSitMJ
p."",'IJ,u",;. IlII) ,feUs...,...
{J~ JiJti$F hila
Pi[.bl.r,wj' !12,'j(jtiO.'lFS,,~
fVIuj_~!i .. (flfJ;f'lIfjSl>'~"'"
CMJ} ,'Ot"ilV> 7ivttJ
,
"-')
J(~"""(Ldr.~ ,
r;nz,;.uttrJr.' ~
/
-'-.
, , /
Figure 1 : Proposed Site Plan
'M" !l!_::K
Group.ln<::.
-
out" events 01 the selected resort sites were impossible to capture given the timeframe for this
study, an attempt has been made 10 conduct parking occupancy surveys during weekdays
and weekends during maior activily periods. Interviews were also conducled over the phone
with the resort staff regarding their parking problems. In addition, national parking
standards including those published by the Institute of I ransportalion Engineers (lIE) and Ihe
Urban Land Institute (UlI) were investigated to determine parking requirements for the
proiect. Parking requirement recommendations for the proposed development were then
made based on the parking survey results and the industry standard parking rates.
Because of the unique characteristics of the penthouse units for possible long-term stays and
layout on the site plan, the units are not included in the parking evaluation. II was assumed
thai the proposed 36 penthouse units would be self-contained through the proposed 80
parking stalls.
Founfain Hills Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evaluation 3 Ii,,,
~
<·",~up, 1""_
2 DATA COLLECTION
The data collection effort included selection of resort sites for parking surveys, phone
interviews with resorts' representatives regarding their parking issues during major events,
and parking occupancy surveys . In addition, the Institute of T ranspartation Engineers (lTE)
and the Urban land Institute (UlI) parking standards were researched to investigate the
parking requirements for the proposed project.
2.1 Similar Resort Sites
Seven (7) resort sites in Arizona were selected to conduct parking surveys: three (3) in
Scottsdale, one (1) in Carefree, two (2) in Tucson, and one (1) in Prescott. These sites were
selected based on their similarity with the project site such as to the number of guest rooms,
square feet of Iota I meeting space, ratio of guest rooms to square feet of meeting space,
property type and other amenities. The proposed development has 233 guest suites with
22,500 square feet of total meeting/conference space. This calculates 10 9.91 as the ratio of
guest rooms per 1,000 square feet of meeting space. The ratio of guest rooms to the Iotal
meeting space was an important Factor in the resort sites selection process.
Table 1 summarizes the size of meeting space, number of guest rooms, on-site parking
inventory, other resort amenities, overflow parking provision, and existence of parking
problems for the seven (7) resort sites selected For parking surveys. The information
presented in Table 1 was obtained by conducting interviews over the phone with the resort
representatives. Although every effort has been made to present accurate inFormation in the
table, CK is not responsible for any misconstrued inFormation obtained From the resort staff
during the interviews. Completed parking survey questionnaires are attached in Appendix B.
Parking occupancy, at Four (4) of the seven (7) sites, is also presented in the table that will be
Further discussed in Section 2.2.
2.2 Parking Occupancy Surveys
While "sold-out" events at the selected resort sites were not possible to capture given the
timeframe For this study, an attempt has been made to conduct parking occupancy surveys
during weekdays and weekends during major activity periods. Of the seven (7) resorts only
Four (4) resorts i.e ., Carefree Resort & Villas, Doubletree Paradise Valley Resort, Hilton
Scottsdale Resort & Villas and Hyatt Regency Resort & Spa at Gainey Ranch were selected in
the greater Phoenix Area to conduct parking surveys. Westward look Resort in Tucson and
Prescott Resort ConFerence Center had no major events scheduled during the study period .
The phone survey revealed that JW Marriott Starr Pass Resort & Spa in Tucson was
experiencing severe parking problems during major events even though they utilize overflow
parking. No occupancy survey was conducted at the resort site to validate the problem.
Fountain Hifls Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evo/uation 4
Table I Summary af Surveyed Resort Sites
Resort Characteristics Pa rking Chara cte ris tics
Resort Name Meeting Rooms per Parking pe r Ove rflow Parking Gu est KSF of On-Site KSF of Parking Spa ce Rooms Meeting Other Amenities Parking Meeting Parking Occupancy ' Prob lems
(KSF ) Sp a ce Spa ce Ex ists Exist
Fou ntain Hills Resort 22.5 233 10.4 Bar, Confe ren ce Center, 426 18 .9 No N.A N.A (proposed) Res tauront, Spo
Carefree Res ort & Vi ll as -34 465 13.7 Bar, Conferen ce Center , 240 7.1 No 4 2 .5% Ni l Carefree Restau rant, Spo
Doub letree Parad ise 30 378 12.6 Bar, Conference Cen ter, 500 16.7 Yes 4 7 .0% Ra re Valley Resort -Scottsdale Restau rant, Spa
Hilton Scotts dal e Res ort & 23 187 8.1 Bar, Conferenc e Ce nte r, 325 14 .1 Yes 75 .0% Freq uen t Villas -Scottsdale Res tau ra nt, Spa
Hyatt Regency Re so rt & 35 490 14 .0 Bar , Confe rence Center, 900 25.7 No 44 .1 % Nil Spa -Scottsdale Res ta urant, Spa
Westward Look Reso rt -20 244 12 .2 Bar , Conference Center, 470 23.5 Yes Not Rar e Tuc son Restaurant, Spa Co ll ec ted'
Prescott Resort Conference 14 160 11 .4 Bar , Ca sino, Conference 527 37.6 No Not Nil Center -Prescott Center , Restau ran t, Spa Col lecte d'
JW Marriott Starr Pass 88 575 6.5 Bar , Confe re nce Cente r, 500 5.7 Yes Na t Freq uent Resort & Spa -Tuc son Golf, Res tauran t, Spa Coll ecte d'
Note:
1. Par king occupancy reported is the maximum occupancy over the study period
2. Parking occupancy survey not conduded since no major activity was reported during th e study period
3. Parking occupancy survey not conducted since parking issues became evident through phon e interviews
Sources: Carefree Resort & Villos, Doubletree Paradise Valley Resort, Hilton Scottsdale Resort & Villas, Hyatt Regency Resort & Spa, Westward look Resort, Pres cott Reso rt Confe re nce Ce nte r, JW
Marriott Starr Pass Resort & Spa, the CK Group, Inc.
Fountain HiHs Coliference Resort & Spa
Parki ng Evaluati on 5
O ctober 2006
",. ,. =!-!"
Group, Inc::.
Parking O ccupa ncy surveys were conducted at the four (4) selected resorts between October
8 th 2006 and October 14th 2006. Table 1 al so shows parking occu pancy and th e total
parking supply at the study resorts.
2.3 National Parking Standards
In addition to the parking surveys conducted on the selected resort sites (documented in
sections 2.1 and 2.2), national parking standa rd s in cluding those published by the Institute
of T ranspartation Engineers (lTE) and the Urban land Institute (UlI) were researched to
propose the parking requirements for the Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa . It should
be noted that industry standards indicate that whenever a parking lot or a garage is
occupied at 90% or above, such a facility is typically considered to be operating at capacity.
In keeping with this standard, it is common practice to factor parking requirements estimated
for parking facilities using the ITE and UU rates by 10 percent. This factor is typically used in
the industry to ensure that the parking turnover can occur without causing drivers to circulate
for long periods of time in search of a vacant parking space.
2.3.1 Institute of Transportation Engineers (lTE)
The total number of patential parking spaces that will be required for the propased project
was estimated based on the peak period parking demand rates published in the ITE Parking
Generation (3,d Edition). Resort Hotel (lTE Code 330) type land use was used to estimate the
parking requirement that provides parking demand rates with guest rooms as the only
independent variable. This ITE land use category caters to the tourist and vacation industry
and provides sleeping accommodations, restaurants, cocktail lounges, retail shops and often
offers a wide variety of recreational facilities/programs (golf courses, tennis courts, beach
access or other amenities). This land use , however, does not cater to the convention and
meeting industry. Therefore, rates published by the ITE for Resort Hotels could easily
underestimate the parking requirement for this project which is geared towards the
convention and meeting industry.
While the ITE average peak period parking demand for a Resort Hotel is 1.42 spaces per
guest room, the 85th percentile parking demand is 1 .86 per guest room. It is prudent to
utilize the 85~ percentile demand rather than the averoge demand, and further increase it by
10 percent for efficient traffic circulation . Using a parking demand rate of 1 .86 per guest
room and increasing it by 10 percent will result in a parking requirement of approximately
477 spaces for the propased Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa project.
Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evaluation 6
2.3.2 Urban Land Institute (ULI)
ULI Shared Parking (1983 Edition) provides parking characteristics for high quality hotels
that are self contained and suppart amenities such as restaurants/lounges, banquet/meeting
rooms, convention facilities, and guest rooms. UU provides a breakdown of parking demand
for each of the major hotel companents including guest rooms, restaurant/lounge facility,
banquet/meeting rooms, and convention facilities. The following are the ULI peak parking
rates for various hotel components:
o Guest Rooms -1.0 space per room
o Restaurant/lounge Facility -10 spaces per thousand square feet
o Banquet/Meeting Rooms -0.5 space per seat
o Convention Facilities -30 spaces per thousand square feet
The following assumptions were made for the activity level of major companents of the
proposed Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa based on the information obtained from
the candidate resort sites surveyed for this study and documented in sections 2.1 and 2.2:
o Convention Facilities -30 percent of the conference guests are shuttled in and out of
the project site using on-site shuttle service
o Guest Suites -25 percent of the guest suites are occupied by the guest not attending
the con ference
o Restaurant-25 percent of the visitors 10 the restaurant are not staying at the resort
The abave stated peak parking rates from UU and activity level assumptions for the major
components of the proposed resort, along with a 10 percent upward adjustment for efficient
traffic circulation, was estimated 10 yield 604 spaces for the proposed project.
Fountain Hifls Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evalualion 7
:3 fiNDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Findings
o The proposed development is a resort conference hotel with 233 rooms and 36
penl house units.
o The proposed development consists of 22,500 square feet of conference space that
includes 12,500 square feet of meeting space and 10,000 square feel of ballroom
space. A total of 506 on-site parking spaces including 138 surface stalls, 288
garage stalls, 72 penthouse garages, and 8 penthouse surface stalls are proposed.
o The Circulation Plan report prepared by Wood Patel & Associates in October
2005 recommends that the proposed 506 parking spaces would be adequate For
the development since the site would allow shared parking belween different land
uses. However, based on the Town of fountain Hills Parking Ordinance, the
proposed development will be required to provide 870 parking spaces.
o A study of seven (7) resort siles, which are similar 10 the proiect site, revealed that
resorts with more than 25 parking spaces per thousand square feel of meeting
space typically does not experience parking shortages during maior events.
o Four (4) of the resort sites surveyed revealed parking occupancy belween 43 and
75 percent under moderate activity levels.
o National parking standards such as the Institute of Transportation Engineers (lTE)
and the Urban land Institute (UlI) reflects porking requirements of 476 and 604
spaces, respectively, nol including the proposed 80 spaces for the penthouse units.
The ITE land use category (Resort Hotel) caters more to the lourist and vacation
industry rather than the convention industry. Because the proposed Fountain Hill
Conference Resort & Spa is geared to the convention and meeting industry, it is
intuitive to see how the rates published by the ITE Parking Generation for Resort
Holels could easily underestimate the parking requirement for this project. On the
other hand, given the similarity belween the functionality of the UU defined Hotel
land use and the proposed project, the parking generation rate recommended in
the UU Shared Parking was considered more appropriate for estimating parking
requirement for this proiect.
Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evoluotion 8
3.2 Recommendations
The final recommendations are based on the parking surveys and review and evaluation of
national parking siandards. Due to Ihe facllhal similar resort sites in Arizona are operating
acceptably with slightly more than 25 spaces per thousand square feel of conference space,
it can be concluded thai a parking ralio of 26 spaces per thousand square feet of conference
space would potentially make the project site self-contained. This yields a parking
requirement of 585 stalls above and beyond the proposed 80 stalls for the penthouse units.
Although the parking requirement of 585 spaces is slightly less than that estimated using the
UU rates (604 spaces), the evidence of acceptable operation from similar resort sites formed
the basis for this conclusion. Therefore, it is recommended that a total parking requirement
of 665 spaces be conditioned for the Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa.
To avoid any possible future parking spillover onto surrounding roadways, including
Palisades Boulevard, it may be prudent for the proposed development to establish an
overflow parking contingency plan. Such a plan may include provisions to shuttle guests
from a nearby remote parking 101 to the resort during a "sold-oul" evenl.
Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evaluation 9
Appendix A
Excerpts from Circulation Report
Fountain Hills Conference Resort & Spa
Parking Evaluation
Parkihg for the !lite was emmmed fur thehotel,itssuppertinguses, and the penthousel.lll:its b~si!d 00 rates
specified by the Towil. of FOm'ltain Hills, 'lIS presented hi E:xI1ibit 10. AccCll'dirtgly, the rawj'Jll1'king
derriandfur the entire devel<ipment is 87{)parlting~-ifthe vmaus\lSes'withfuthe del(eloprnfmtwere
si:and,alooe .faoilities With no sharing' of :parking!lpllces. However. it is anticipated .that peak parldng
demand for 1I1ll.l5eswitllfu the. development wllinofoccur at the same ·time, thenlby.a:Jlowing 'sharing of
parkiil~ spilCl:sbetWeentheJand -uses .
. Basedon infunna:tioo from.theCliel'lt,Shared p~:g demand was detmnined for three scenarios as
follows:
• Scenario I is defin.edaa an resltlentiaJUllits being ,occupied, and ruIhote! ro\)msbeingcoccupied
fur.3 conference with SO% of the botei. guest usiqg, 'the on.Siteshuttle serviCe. Furthei:. thl!ltCisno
eVent in tbebitllfoom..
• 'Scenatioll is defihed as aU residential unitsbeingoe.cupied, mtd.aIlhotel rooms befugOccupied
fOr a.eonfurence withnohotelguest!!usmg on..sites'hultlesemce. Further. there is·noev:entin the
ballroom.
• ScerumomiS'deflnedaaallresidentilllunitsbe1rig oCGllpied, and allhiltelroomsbemg l)Ccupied
fora ClIlnference·with So?,4,guest$USing~,on~teShuttlesetllice. Further, the.balliootnisbeing
(Iccupiedfor:an event
It is antlriipatedthat 349parldng spaces will be requiXed. fOr S¢etlario I,46$paridng .spa.cesWill be
.reqlrit:ed for Scenario n,and 474 spllces'WI11 be required fur SCenario -m. The detailed analysis is
~ilIJjJxhibitlQ.
Based'OIl theanalY$is, Scenario m. pemtes -the-w:x.it:mun parkil1gdemand. It:i!! ·tlierefore:re.commended
that a.minimum Qf414psrIting'spaces shQuld be proVided to acool'llttlooate Bite .parkingneeds.. The
pmpcsed.500 p'11'king.SPllCCS woaldadequately meet this. demand.
17 F'olU,litlJlHlIIs CoHforeiietJi1!5IJrl& Spa
ClrC/lm/io1tPlall
WP If!jS2&8LOJ
WOODIPA,l'EL
ProJElct: Fountain HiIJ$ Resort
!.pGatlop: Phoenix; Arizona
Date: 1112105
E!ii'r.>rl .... ·· •.
1iI·····~··
.,
EXHIBIT 10: ONoSIT!:! PARKING ANALYSIS
50% 50%
WJP;,J.rtJ: OsmJ1,01
!::ng!neer. Mhlsh Sebnekar •. PE
Analyst CllllltanJI. Jhaverj,I;tIT
Exploration of
Town Legal Services
Provide an objective analysis of recent
legal services and viable options.
Town Attorney expenses
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
Town Attorney Town Attorney Plus Outside Legal*Extrapolated
2008-09 Town Attorney Costs by
Category
General Rep.
Contract Rev.
Election
IGAs
Plan/Zone
All Other
$11,000
TOTAL $242,211
$144,480
$44,000
$17,500
$7,500 $17,750
General Rep.
Solid Waste
Contract Rev.
Plan/Zone
Risk Management
IGAs
Lakeside
Nichols/Sons
All Other
TOTAL $202,233
$114,000
$18,500
$18,000
$17,750
$13,500
$7,500
$5,500
$5,000
$4,500
2009-10 Town Attorney Costs by
Category
How do we compare
Survey of six comparably sized
communities
Per capita town attorney expenses
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
Fountain
Hills
Payson Prescott Oro
Valley
Queen
Creek
Maricopa Apache
Junction
In House
•Create internal legal function
•Continue contracting with outside firm
Salaries *$195,000
--Attorney ($115,000)
--Paralegal ($ 45,000)
--Secretary ($ 40,000)
Benefits $ 58,500
Outside Legal $ 50,000
Supplies (includes BS&M) $ 25,000
Internal Support and Charges $ 5,000
Meetings $ 6,500
Total (excluding one-time start-up expenses)$340,000
*based on municipal employment survey
Pros
•Singular attention to Town issues
•On-site staff/council availability
•Costs not as sensitive to issues/time
Cons
•Some loss of legal institutional knowledge/history
•Higher costs:
-Increased rate associated with
specialized legal services, single Town
Attorney cannot address all issues
-Higher annual budget to support in-house
legal division
•Create internal legal function
•Continue contracting with outside firm
Pros
•Maintain legal costs near current level
•Access to firm specialists and support staff
•Ability to change firm or primary attorney
Cons
•Costs will always be subject to the
volatility/complexity of issues
•Very difficult to control annual budget for legal
services
Redacted
Redacted
Redacted
Redacted