HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005.0407.TCREM.Minutes TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR AND EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE
FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL
April 7,2005
Mayor Nichols called the Executive Session to order at 5:05 p.m.
VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: PURSUANT TO A.R.S. 38-431.03.A4, FOR
DISCUSSION OR CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEYS OF THE PUBLIC BODY IN ORDER
TO CONSIDER ITS POSITION AND INSTRUCT ITS ATTORNEYS REGARDING THE PUBLIC
BODY'S POSITION REGARDING CONTRACTS THAT ARE THE SUBJECT OF NEGOTIATIONS,
IN PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR IN SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS
CONDUCTED IN ORDER TO AVOID OR RESOLVE LITIGATION. (SPECIFICALLY,
NEGOTIATIONS WITH RESPECT TO STATE TRUST LAND.)
Councilman McMahan MOVED to convene the Executive Session and Councilman Archambault SECONDED
the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Nichols recessed the Executive Session at 6:05 p.m.
so that the Board of the Eagle Mountain Community Facilities District could convene at 6:15 p.m. The Board
concluded their business and adjourned at 6:25 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM#2—RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION
Mayor Nichols convened the Regular Session of the Town Council at 6:30 p.m. Following the invocation by
Pastor Mark Lansberry, the Fountains Methodist Church, roll call was taken.
ROLL CALL — Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Vice
Mayor Nicola, Mayor Nichols, Councilman Schlum, Councilman Kavanagh, Councilman Kehe, Councilman
Archambault, and Councilman McMahan. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Town Manager Tim Pickering,
Town Clerk Bev Bender, and Accounting Supervisor Julie Ghetti were also present.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS
* Mayor Nichols read a proclamation declaring April 11, 2005 World Parkinson Disease Awareness
Day in Fountain Hills.
The Mayor stated that Parkinson disease is a progressive disorder of the central nervous system, affecting more
than one million people in the United States. He noted that the American Parkinson Disease Association, Inc.,
founded in 1961, has sought to ease the burden and find the cure for this disease through research, patient, and
family services and support groups throughout the United States. He added that the Town of Fountain Hills
recognizes the efforts of The American Parkinson Disease Association, Inc., to raise funds and promote
awareness to fight this disease and improve the quality of those afflicted with the disease. Mayor Nichols said
that it is his honor to declare April 11, 2005 World Parkinson Disease Awareness Day in Fountain Hills.
* Mayor Nichols presented a Certificate of Achievement to David Killian for being named 2005 Youth
of the Year.
Mayor Nichols announced that DAVID KILLIAN, age 17, has always been somewhat of a star but now it was
official. He said that David was selected as the 2005 Youth of the Year for the Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater
Scottsdale this past Saturday, March 19, 2005 at the "Celebrate Youth — Inspiration of the Next Generation"
event in Scottsdale. He noted that the Reader's Digest Foundation sponsored the event and it was administered
by Boys & Girls Clubs of America, the national program that recognizes superior leadership skills, academic
achievement, and outstanding service to Boys & Girls Clubs and the community. He stated that David is an
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 1 of 10
honor student and nine-year member of the Boys & Girls Club and he was awarded this honor for demonstrating
five core values of the organization, namely home and family, community service, scholastic achievement,
spiritual values and service to the club. He added that David will compete against other Boys & Girls Clubs' ,v)
youth for the State of Arizona Youth of the Year title in Washington, D.C. and said that President. in an official
White House ceremony, will install the winner in September. He said that should David win the competition, he
would personally attend the ceremony in Washington. In addition, the winner will receive a $10,000
scholarship from the Reader's Digest Foundation. He commented on the important role the Boys & Girls Club
plays in Fountain Hills, wished David good look in the upcoming competition, and presented him with a
Certificate of Excellence for his achievement. He congratulated him on his accomplishments to date.
David Killian expressed appreciation to the entire community of Fountain Hills for their support.
* The Mayor read a proclamation declaring April 3—9, 2005 National Boys& Girls Club Week.
Mayor Nichols stated that the young people of Fountain Hills are tomorrow's leaders and stressed the
importance of providing professional youth services to help them cope with a wide range of social and financial
hardships. He said that the Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Scottsdale—Four Peaks Branch provides services to
more than 1250 young people annually. He added that the Clubs are the forefront of efforts to combat substance
abuse and delinquency and provide much needed services such as daycare and literacy programs. He noted that
the Boys & Girls Club in Fountain Hills helps to ensure that the Town's youths are off the streets and offers
them a safe and supportive place to go and participate in quality programs. He announced that the Boys & Girls
Clubs of Greater Scottsdale—Four Peaks Branch will celebrate National Boys & Girls Club Week from April 3
to April 9, 2005 along with some 2400 clubs and more than 4 million young people. Mayor Nichols said that it
was his honor to declare April 3—9th Boys &Girls Club Week in Fountain Hills.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
Manuel Ursu, one of the principals on the Fountain View project, which is on the agenda this evening, said that
a request was submitted earlier this evening for a continuance (Agenda Item#11). He said that at this time, he
would like to request that the Council consider directing the Planning Staff to initiate an amendment to the
Zoning Code that would allow non-residential structures in multi-family districts to exceed a building length of
200 feet. He said that he believes (and thinks that staff believes) that the original intent of that code was to
address residential structures. He noted that other structures are permitted in the multi-family districts subject to
a Special Use Permit, such as churches, schools, and convalescent homes as they are proposing. He expressed
the opinion that it makes sense for the decision-making body to use their discretion and allow this change to
occur.
Mayor Nichols directed the Town Manager to have staff look into this matter and determine whether an
amendment to the Zoning Code was appropriate.
Mayor Nichols stated that the applicant has requested that Agenda Item#11 (a request for a Special Use Permit
for the Fountain Hills Senior Care Center) be continued and requested a motion from the Council to continue
this item until such time as staff has had the opportunity to review the language on the Zoning Ordinance and
prepare recommendations for the Council to review.
Councilman Archambault MOVED to continue Agenda Item#11 (Request to approve a Special Use Permit for
the Fountain Hills Senior Care Center) until such time as staff brings back the results of their analysis of
whether or not an amendment to the Zoning Code is appropriate for Council discussion and consideration.
Councilman McMahan SECONDED the motion.
In response to a request for clarification from Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Mayor McNichols stated that
the request for a Special Use Permit would be considered after the determination was made as to the possible
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance as requested by Mr. Ursu.
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 2 of 10
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7 to 0).
Mayor Nichols commented that he allowed discussion of the above issue to take place out of order so that
members of the audience who were present to hear and/or speak on that agenda item would not have to stay until
the Council got to that part of the agenda.
CONSENT AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM#1 —CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF
MARCH 17,2005.
AGENDA ITEM # 2 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2005-30, APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE "COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE," ESTABLISHING STANDARDS
FOR THE SELECTION AND APPOINTMENT PROCESS FOR VACANCIES ON BOARDS,
COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES.
AGENDA ITEM #3 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A LEASE FOR THE COMMUNITY
THEATER OCCUPYING TOWN PROPERTY AT 17325 E. RAND DRIVE AND 11455 E. SAGUARO
DRIVE.
AGENDA ITEM #4 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2005-23, ABANDONING WHATEVER
RIGHT,TITLE OR INTEREST THE TOWN HAS IN CERTAIN PUBLIC UTILITY AND DRAINAGE
EASEMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEASTERLY PROPERTY LINES OF PLAT 605C,BLOCK
1, LOT 10 (11039 N. PINTO DRIVE) AS RECORDED IN BOOK 164 OF MAPS, PAGE 14, RECORDS
OF MARICOPA COUNTY,ARIZONA. EA05-04(COUP).
AGENDA ITEM # 5 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2005-24 ABANDONING WHATEVER
RIGHT,TITLE OR INTEREST THE TOWN HAS IN CERTAIN PUBLIC UTILITY AND DRAINAGE
NW EASEMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINES OF PLAT 505D, BLOCK 2,
LOT 13 (16821 N. SOURDOUGH PLACE) AS RECORDED IN BOOK 158 OF MAPS, PAGE 41,
RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY,ARIZONA. EA05-05(MERRELL).
AGENDA ITEM #6 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2005-25, ABANDONING WHATEVER
RIGHT,TITLE OR INTEREST THE TOWN HAS IN CERTAIN PUBLIC UTILITY AND DRAINAGE
EASEMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINES OF PLAT 602A, BLOCK 1,
LOT 30 (15610 E. CAVERN DRIVE) AS RECORDED IN BOOK 161 OR MAPS, PAGE 42, RECORDS
OF MARICOPA COUNTY,ARIZONA. EA05-06(CARLSON).
AGENDA ITEM#7—CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 05-03,A TECHNICAL AMENDMENT TO
CORRECT AN ERROR IN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TAX CODE RELATING TO
COMMERCIAL RENTAL ACTIVITY.
AGENDA ITEM #8 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2005-26, APPROVING AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (IGA) BETWEEN THE FOUNTAIN HILLS UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT #98 AND THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS REGARDING THE SHARING
OF FACILITIES.
AGENDA ITEM #9 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT
FOR "SABINAS ESTATES CONDOMINIUMS," A 2-UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED
AT 16927 E.SABINAS DRIVE,AKA LOT 4,BLOCK 4,PLAT 105. CASE#S2005-03.
AGENDA ITEM#10—CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT
FOR"SHERWOOD VILLAS CONDOMINIUMS," A 2-UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED
AT 14461 SHERWOOD DRIVE,AKA LOT 7,BLOCK 12,PLAT 104. CASE#S2005-02.
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 3 of 10
Councilman Archambault MOVED to approve the consent agenda as read and Councilman McMahan
SECONDED the motion.
A roll call vote was taken with the following results:
Councilman Kehe Aye
Councilman Schlum Aye
Councilman Kavanagh Aye
Councilwoman Nicola Aye
Mayor Nichols Aye
Councilman McMahan Aye
Vice Mayor Archambault Aye
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7 to 0).
ACTION AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM #11 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE
FOUNTAIN HILLS SENIOR CARE CENTER, WHICH WOULD ALLOW A CONVALESCENT
HOME UP TO 40 FEET IN HEIGHT IN THE "R-4" MULTI-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT,
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF VERDE RIVER DRIVE AND EL LAGO BLVD.,
AKA FOUNTAIN VIEW FINAL PLAT. CASE#SU2004-04.
This agenda item was continued prior to the reading of the Consent Agenda.
AGENDA ITEM #12 — PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING ORDINANCE 05-02, WHICH WOULD
AMEND THE"OFFICIAL ZONING DISTRICTS MAP"FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TO
REZONE LOT 34 AND LOT 60, BLOCK 1,FINAL PLAT 506C AND THE ABUTTING UNPLATTED
PARCEL OF LAND TO THE WEST OF LOT 34 FROM THE "R1-35 & RI-43" SINGLE-FAMILY
ZONING DISTRICTS TO A "RI-35 PUD," SINGLE-FAMILY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
ZONING DESIGNATION. CASE#Z2004-10.
Senior Planner Dana Burkhardt informed the Council that for the sake of discussion this evening, staff would
discuss the entire project that had a number of actions agendized this evening, first the PUD or the rezoning of
the property; second,the Special Use Permit; third the subdivision application and finally the cut and fill waiver.
He referred to an aerial displayed in the Chambers that depicted the location of the property and commented on
the proposed lot configuration (12 lots). He advised that the applicant was requesting a 12 lot single-family
subdivision to be accessed from a private gated hillside local road cul-de-sac extending west from the Cerro
Alto Drive cul-de-sac terminus. He added that the applicant was also requesting a PUD to allow a gated private
roadway, reduced minimum front yard setbacks from 40 feet to 20 feet, walls over 3.5" in private rights-of-way
and the front-yard minimum setbacks, and an alternative land disturbance methodology. He noted that prior
Councils had approved extended cul-de-sac lengths as well as the number of units on cul-de-sacs (above and
beyond what the subdivision ordinance allows)by Planned Unit Development.
Mr. Burkhardt referred to the subdivision layout and said that the Planning& Zoning Commission discussed the
project and unanimously recommended denial of the previous design, which consisted of a 14-unit project rather
than the current 12. He said that the Commission had not reviewed the 12-lot configuration. He said that staff
was recommending approval based on the applicant's adherence to hillside protection easements over some
existing outcroppings. He added that in response to concerns expressed by the Planning & Zoning Commission
regarding the fact that the secondary emergency access road was designed to cut through an existing lot adjacent
to an existing residence, the applicant had since brought all of the gated entry and turn around areas onto the
applicant's property. He discussed the fact that the applicant had revised the secondary emergency access
roadway from a 20-foot width to 16-feet. He added, however, that the Fire Department requires a minimum 20-
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 4 of 10
foot paved width, based on the steep gradient of the access road, and the applicant had agreed to go back to the
originally proposed 20-foot design with. He noted that staff anticipated very limited use of this secondary
roadway, which would only occur in the event the Cerro Alto Circle cul-de-sac was closed and an emergency
occurred beyond the point of closure. He added that the secondary emergency roadway would be gated and
would allow emergency access only at the Golden Eagle Boulevard intersection and at the intersection with the
proposed private roadway.
Mr. Burkhardt also discussed the proposed hillside local cul-de-sac roadway and said that it did have short
sections that exceeded the maximum 12 percent, within 400 feet of one another. He noted that the Town
Engineer believed that this was acceptable and recommended that the roadway design be approved. He
commented on land disturbance and said that at the direction of staff, the applicant was proposing to aggregate
the total allowable disturbance for all slopes greater than 10% and allocate a disturbable area to each lot on the
Final Plat. He noted that the preliminary plat provided conceptual disturbance envelopes for each lot based on
the disturbance allocations based on the "Data Table". He noted that the PUD provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance allowed for exceptions to the Hillside Preservation requirements and could permit up to an average of
20,442 square feet of land disturbance for each of the 121 lots. He stated that the Council had the discretion to
approve either the "gross" methodology presented on the preliminary plat cover (16,636 square feet), the "net"
methodology, which allowed approximately 14,500 square feet of disturbance for each lot or the "PUD"
methodology, which allowed up to 20,442 square feet of disturbance for each lot. He noted that staff suggests
that the Council maintain consistency with recent approvals and approve the most restrictive methodology for
this project, the "net"calculation. He added that members of the Planning and Zoning Commission commented
on the fact that this was a very restrictive area of disturbance for the size of homes being constructed today.
Mr. Burkhardt advised that there was one location in the secondary access road, which exceeds the maximum
allowable 10 feet of fill. He said that the widening of the secondary emergency access roadway to 20 feet, as a
condition of approval, would increase the fill by a couple of feet but the fill would be retained by a wall. He
Ladded that the fill location would be visible from the westbound lane of Golden Eagle Boulevard and stated that
staff had worked with the applicant to lessen the steepness of the secondary emergency access road, which
resulted in greater cuts and fills, both of which would be visible from adjacent properties and rights-of-way. He
reported that staff had received protests from the neighborhood (report indicates that approximately nine
residents living in the neighborhood of this project spoke in opposition to the proposed PUD at the meeting). He
added that staff recommends approval, subject to the following stipulations and suggests that if the Council
wished to approve the PUD and remain consistent with the application of the land preservation requirements,
that they approve this subdivision with the "net" disturbance methodology (approximately 14,500 square feet of
land disturbance per lot). Staff also recommended approval of Ordinance 05-02,the Preliminary Plat"high
Nob Acres",and the associated Cut& Fill Waiver. He added that staff recommends the following conditions
on the Preliminary Plat and Cut&Fill Waiver approval:
1) The landowner shall provide a hillside protection easement (HPE) over the natural rock formations
identified in the sensitive areas study and over the natural arroyo crossing the property on the final plat, so
as to not impose on the building envelopes shown on the preliminary plat.
2) The final plat shall have a table of allocated disturbance for each lot, and a notation stating that prior to
building permit issuance for each lot, the property owner shall grant the Town a Hillside Protection
Easement over the undisturbed portions of the lot.
3) Prior to final plat recordation, the applicant shall submit a final copy of the proposed deed covenants and
restrictions for concurrent recordation with the final plat.
4) The secondary emergency access road shall have a paved surfaced width of 20 feet with 2 inches of asphalt
on six inches of aggregate base course and be gated for emergency access at the Golden Eagle Boulevard
and at the private roadway intersections.
5) Add a notation to the final plat stating that all homes within this subdivision are required to provide attic
sprinklers per Rural Metro Fire Safety Standards.
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 5 of 10
6) Prior to Final Plat recordation, submit and gain approval for all necessary improvement plans including
paving, grading and drainage, landscape and irrigation, sewer and water services, and a final drainage
report. A construction assurance bond will also be necessary prior to grading and final plat recordation.
Mr. Burkhardt stated that he would be happy to answer any questions from the Council. Mayor Nichols asked
whether any citizens wished to speak at this time and Ms. Bender advised that there were five and one card was
submitted by Marian Sears who did not wish to speak but who wanted her opposition noted in the record. Ms.
Sears wrote on the speaker card that she "was very concerned about the impact of this proposed development on
the neighborhood of Cerro Alto regarding traffic and crowding".
Mayor Nichols asked the remaining speakers to come forward as their names are called.
Bob Sternfels, 16803 E. Palisades
Mr. Sternfels,an attorney, informed the Council that the developer was hospitalized on Monday and so he asked
Mr. Sternfels to represent him at this meeting. He said that the primary purpose of a PUD was to allow creative
design that would otherwise not be permissible under conventional zoning. He stated the opinion that the
proposed design was creative and its primary purpose was to protect the environment around the subdivision.
He added that the Zoning Ordinance, with regard to PUD's, specifically states that the setbacks could be
modified so that they could aggregate the disturbance area to allow a much more visible, beautiful subdivision.
He added that it also allowed them to do various things with respect to lot coverage to permit a more beautiful
subdivision.
Mr. Sternfels advised that there were some people at the Planning &Zoning hearing who objected to the length
of the cul-de-sac, approximately 2800 feet. He said it was mentioned that such a length would be unique to
Fountain Hills and stated that that was not true. There were two other cul-de-sacs, one that was 2800 lineal feet
that was approved on Boulder Drive and another one at Shadow Canyon that was 3700 lineal feet. He added
that objections were also voiced relative to the number of lots in the subdivision and noted that there were six
cul-de-sacs in Town that contained a much greater number of homes (i.e. Eagle Mountain Parcel 5, 37 homes;
Parcel 4, 37; Parcel 13, 40; Westbridge Estates, 39; Shadow Canyon, 60) so the precedent has already been set
for larger number of homes on cul-de-sacs. He noted that the purpose of a cul-de-sac was to reduce traffic and
said according to the Traffic Civil Engineer's standards, there would be a traffic count both ways of
approximately 242 vehicles per day. He said they should compare that to the average local traffic of 700 and
realize that they still would have a very quiet roadway, which would contribute to the ambiance of the area.
Mr. Sternfels stated that the issue of safety had also been raised and it had been said that with a cul-de-sac there
needed to be an alternate route to get out. He noted that history demonstrated that this was simply not true. He
pointed out that there would be a 50-foot right-of-way with a 20-foot setback on either side for a total of 90 feet.
He reported that there had never been an accident in Fountain Hills in a cul-de-sac that required more than just a
few feet. He expressed the opinion that safety was not really a concern and that was why the developer was
proposing, in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance on PUDs that allowed the off-site dedication of
property, to improve the open space of Fountain Hills. He added that the alternate access site was really
unnecessary and was not required on some other projects. He said the developer was proposing that if the PUD
were granted without the alternate access site, he would donate that site to the Town of Fountain Hills for park
and recreation purposes. He noted that it could be sold and that would amount to approximately a$500,000 gift
to the Town. He indicated his willingness to respond to questions from the Council and emphasized that there
were three circular sections in the subdivision, which provided for three helicopter pads and three passage points
to enhance public safety. He added that the developer was willing to go either way.
Mr. John Knupf, 14887 E. Cerro Alto Drive
Mr. Knupf addressed the Council and said he bought his home at that location 15 years ago because he liked the
idea of a small cul-de-sac and limited traffic. He said that the proposal to extend the cul-de-sac,possibly double
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 6 of 10
it, and build 12 more homes was very upsetting and would impact traffic, safety, and the quality of life in the
area. He discussed the negative impacts of traffic putting in necessary infrastructure for the project and said it
would constitute an invasion of the owners' privacy. He urged the Council to consider the Planning & Zoning
Commissions decision and vote to deny the request.
Lowell Hamilton, 14721 E. Cerro Alto
Mr. Hamilton also spoke in opposition and stated that he purchased his lot on Cerro Alto in 1985 because he
wanted to find a quiet place in the hills. He said he bought it because of the views, the peace and the quiet. and
because he did not want to have a lot of traffic. He stated that he also wanted to purchase a home on a cul-de-
sac to ensure that there would not be any through traffic. He said that his property had good views and was a
wonderful place to live. He urged the Council to review the reasons why the Planning & Zoning Commission
denied the request and noted that it was a PUD-35, which meant it would have a 20-foot setback instead of a 40-
foot setback. He noted that this would cluster the homes on the ridge to maximize the developer's building
envelope. He pointed out that this was originally 60 lots and MCO in the 1970's came through and developed
clusters of 10 to 12 lots on the south side. He said that when they got to the end of the cul-de-sac, they had 26
acres left over and they put it all into one lot with one house. He noted that shortly after he purchased his
property, the man who bought that large lot asked the Architectural Committee in 1989 to subdivide the lots into
five parcels. He stated that the neighbors looked at the plan and said they could live with the five parcels but
what he then wanted to do was reserve ten acres for further development. He also did not want to agree to put a
road through to Golden Eagle and therefore the residents voiced their objections. He asked what had changed
over the last 14 years and commented that there were limits to how much the setback was and to the number of
houses on the cul-de-sac as well as other problems. He expressed the opinion that there were just too many
variances being made and urged the Council to allow the existing rules to remain in place. He added that it was
all about money for them while for the residents it was all about the views, the quiet, and the quality of life they
currently enjoyed.
Bill Varanese
Mr. Varanese said that he currently lives off of Golden Eagle and had recently purchased a lot on the hill
proposed to be developed. He added that he just wanted to register opposition to this development. He advised
that no one received any notice of the development going in and said he believed he was legally entitled to be
notified of this case. He added that he attended the Planning &Zoning meeting and opposed the proposal along
with other residents in that area. He commented that he did not fully understand the procedures, but the
Planning & Zoning Board denied the case and now it was before the Council. He asked whether their decision
carried any weight. He added that as far as the concessions offered by the developer, he believed that
eliminating two lots was miniscule to the whole effort. He stated that now he hears the developer was
attempting to bribe the Council by offering a $500,000 lot and spoke in opposition to the manner in which the
case was being handled. He asked the Council to protect the residents and their quality of life.
Michael Greene, 14510 Golden Eagle
Mr. Greene, speaking on behalf of the residents who live around the 1400 block of Golden Eagle Boulevard,
said that they too were opposed to the development as proposed. He said that the proposal would drastically
change the area and noted that he owns the lot that was isolated by the emergency access road and would
become a neighbor of one. He added that the steepness of the road had potential hazards and recommended that
the Council abide by the decisions rendered by the members of the Planning & Zoning Board. He said that at
the very least they would ask that with the changes the developer had talked about, that the proposal be
resubmitted to the Planning & Zoning Board and revisited. He stated that perhaps some compromise could be
reached and added that the residents recognized that the owner of the property wanted to build on that land, but
the neighbors have had little or no input.
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 7 of 10
There being no additional citizens wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
AGENDA ITEM #13 CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 05-02, WHICH WOULD AMEND THE
"OFFICIAL ZONING DISTRICTS MAP" FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TO REZONE
LOT 34 AND LOT 60, BLOCK 1, FINAL PLAT 506C AND THE ABUTTING UNPLATTED PARCEL
OF LAND TO THE WEST OF LOT 34 FROM THE "R1-35 & R1-43" SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING
DISTRICTS TO A "R1-35 PUD," SINGLE FAMILY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING
DESIGNATION. CASE#Z2004-10.
Vice Mayor Nicola MOVED to deny Ordinance 05-02 and Councilman Archambault SECONDED the motion.
Councilman Kavanagh commented that something was going to be built on the land but he was a little
uncomfortable with the present plan. He said there were good and bad reasons for accepting or denying a
request and while he realized that the suggestion of a donation of a lot was made in good faith with no ulterior
motives, it made him very uncomfortable because it created the appearance of something else. He stated that
perhaps the land could be used to open the lots up or views as opposed to an in-kind cash payment. He added
that by the same token, the people who did not want the development or wanted it minimized had to also
understand that the Council had to remain consistent in the application of its ordinances and there were longer
cul-de-sacs and they had done similar things in the past. He said he personally believed that there was a
compromise and they were fairly close and he would urge the developer and members of the community to get
together. He also cautioned the community members about the importance of being reasonable and said be
believed the development was "not that far away" so he hoped they would work together to reach a satisfactory
conclusion.
Councilman Archambault said that although he recognized the owner's availability to subdivide this property
and knew there probably would at some time have to be a PUD on this because of the physical topography of
the land, one of the things that bothered him on this case was the disturbance envelope. He stated that he was
the one who asked Mr. Burkhardt to review the Section 8 and compare the disturbance envelopes and said when
there was property in Eagle's Nest selling for $500,000 a lot and they were able to disturb 19,000 or 20,000
square feet, four times the footprint, the lots could possibly put a 3500 to 4000 square foot house on the nob and
then you were looking at a much larger house. He expressed the opinion that additional research needed to be
conducted and cautioned against setting a precedent to extend the lots.
Councilman Schlum stated that he believed the plan was close but not quite there. He commented on the beauty
of the property and expressed concerns regarding negative impacts on the neighbors in the brand new
subdivision. He reiterated that the plan was close but needed more work and said he did not like the cul-de-sac
nobs. He said he hoped that something could be worked out.
Councilman McMahan agreed with Councilman Schlum and Councilman Kavanagh's remarks and said he
believed the developer should go back and rework the plan. He added that additional citizen input was also
needed and he would like to have them"tweak"it and resubmit the plan through Planning&Zoning.
Councilman Kehe commented that there was a need for some compromise to occur and urged the developer to
get together with the residents in an effort to arrive at an acceptable solution. He added that he was in favor of a
"net"disturbance rather than "gross"and said he would like to obtain information on the impact that would have
on the number of lots.
David Montgomery, Montgomery Engineering, the engineer for the project, responded that they were talking in
the area of 2,000 square feet per lot, a total of 1500 to 2000 square feet of difference in the area per lot. He said
that they could either go with smaller envelopes or fewer lots in order to reduce the disturbance area.
In response to a question from Councilman Kehe, Mr. Burkhardt discussed "net" disturbance versus "gross" 141111)
disturbance. He stated that this was a complex issue to grasp. He said that public or private roadways were
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 8 of 10
exempt from the Town's Hillside Preservation Ordinance (Mower amendment referenced) the roadway
disturbance does not count against or for you. He explained that staff had always interpreted the "net"
methodology to be that the entire lot, with the exception of what would be disturbed because of roadway
construction, was calculated for slopes to determine the allocation of disturbance for each lot. He added that
"gross" methodology includes all the disturbance of the roadway or that land, the slope, where the roadway is
and then allocates that to the lot. He said that the consequence staff sees in doing that is the developer does not
have any incentive to minimize the disturbance for roadway construction.
Councilman Kehe asked what has been the principle procedure in the past and Mr. Burkhardt responded that the
most recent two residential subdivisions approved by Council abided by the "net" methodology. He said prior
to that, most subdivisions were approved through a development agreement or had some alternative
methodology approved.
Councilman Kehe commented that in order to get a disturbance for a larger home, one of the ways to do that was
to reduce the number of lots.
Councilman Kavanagh stated the opinion that neither party appeared thrilled with the emergency access road
and said if this comes back to the Council and Mr. Burkhardt says it has to be there, he would only vote in
support if it was put in. He added that he believed the road could somehow be eliminated and perhaps larger
lots could be created. He urged the developer to talk with Mr. Burkhardt regarding this matter. He also spoke in
support of pushing the houses back in order to be more sensitive to the resident's concerns regarding visibility.
Mr. Sternfels said he was hearing from members of the Council that they were close to reaching a compromise
on this matter. He noted that if the Council granted the motion to deny the case, they might be procedurally
impacted and not be able to come back again for another entire year. He requested that the Council grant a
continuance or send the case back to Planning & Zoning; then they were still in the ballpark and had the
opportunity to continue to work on a possible solution.
Town Attorney Andrew McGuire stated if the Council voted to deny the case, the project would be put out for
one year. He added that it would be more expeditious to send it back to Planning &Zoning.
Vice Mayor Nicola WITHDREW her motion to deny Ordinance 05-02 and Councilman Archambault
WITHDREW his second to the motion.
Vice Mayor Nicola MOVED TO CONTINUE AGENDA ITEM#13 until a revised plan had gone through the
Planning & Zoning process and was placed on an agenda for Council review and consideration. Councilman
McMahan SECONDED the motion.
The Vice Mayor AMENDED THE MOTION to state that Agenda Items #14 and 15 were also to be
CONTINUED for the reasons stated above and Councilman McMahan SECONDED the amendment to the
motion.
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7 to 0).
Mayor Nichols thanked everyone for their input and said he hopes everyone is able to reach a satisfactory
compromise.
AGENDA ITEM #14 - CONSIDERATION OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR "HIGH NOB
ACRES," A 14-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED ONLOT 34 AND
LOT 60,BLOCK 1, FINAL PLAT 506C AND THE ABUTTING UNPLATTED PARCEL OF LAND TO
THE WEST OF LOT 34. CASE#S2004-22.
Continued. See above discussion.
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 9 of 10
AGENDA ITEM #15 — CONSIDERATION OF A CUT AND FILL WAIVER FOR "HIGH NOB
ACRES," A 14-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON LOT 34 AND
LOT 60, BLOCK 1, FINAL PLAT 506C AND THE ABUTTING UNPLATTED PARCEL OF LAND TO ,44)
THE WEST OF LOT 34. CASE#CFW2005-01.
Continued. See above discussion.
AGENDA ITEM #16 - COUNCIL ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW OF THE MEETING TO IDENTIFY
PROCEDURAL STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES AND DISCUSS POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR FUTURE MEETINGS.
There were no items to discuss.
AGENDA ITEM #17 — 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) OR DIRECTING STAFF TO CONDUCT FURTHER
RESEARCH AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL:
None.
AGENDA ITEM#18-SUMMARY OF COUNCIL REQUESTS BY TOWN MANAGER
Mr. Pickering said that staff would review the Zoning Ordinance regarding the 200-foot limit on commercial
buildings.
AGENDA ITEM#19—ADJOURNMENT
Councilman Archambault MOVED to adjourn and you cilman McMahan SECONDED the motion, which
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7 to 0). The meeting ad' urned at 7:35 p.m.
TOW IN AIN HI
By
LWally chols, or
ATTEST AND
PEPARED BY:
Bevelyn J. en r,Town Clerk
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Session held
by the Town Council of Fountain Hills on the 7th day of April 2005. I further certify that the meeting was duly
called and that a quorum was present.
DATED this 21st day of April, 2005.
r
Bevelyn J. n r,Town Clerk
E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2005\04-07-05 Regular and Executive Session.doc Page 10 of 10