HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006.1010.TCWSEM.MinutesTOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE AND WORK STUDY SESSION OF THE
FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL
OCTOBER 10, 2006
AGENDA ITEM #1— CALLTO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Mayor Nichols called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Vice Mayor Kehe,
Councilmember Leger, Councilmember McMahan, Councilmember Schlum, Councilmember Archambault and
Councilmember Dickey. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Town Manager Tim Pickering, Planner Kate Zanon
and Town Clerk Bev Bender were also present.
Mayor Nichols was absent from the meeting.
Vice Mayor Kehe announced that Mayor Nichols is ill but expects to be back at work within the next day or so.
AGENDA ITEM #2 — DISCUSSION OF IMPLEMENTING THE STRATEGIC PLAN PRIORITY:
STRICTLY ENFORCING THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE. COMPARISON OF
THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT PROCESS AND THE VARIANCE PROCESS.
Mr. Pickering stated that Kate Zanon would provide an overview of a report prepared by her and Richard
Turner.
Ms. Zanon addressed the Council and said that during the Council Retreat held in February 2006, the Council
prioritized and discussed ways to implement the Town's Strategic Plan goals. The Executive Management
Team refined the goals and the Retreat's results were summarized in a report titled, "Implementing the Strategic
Plan, Operational Planning Retreats 2006." The Town has already taken steps to achieve Strategic Plan Goal #4
to strictly enforce the General Plan and Zoning Ordinances and in June brought forward an increase in various
filing fees. She stated evening they were here to discuss Objective 4.2 (under Goal #4), which was to eliminate
the use of Special Use Permits in lieu of variances for height and other categories of exception.
Ms. Zanon briefly discussed the differences between Special Use Permits and variances and noted that a Special
Use Permit was a specific approval for a permitted use that had been determined to be more intense or to have a
potentially greater impact than other permitted uses within the same Zoning District. Uses subject to a Special
Use Permit were specifically listed in the Zoning Ordinance. She discussed the importance of the Council being
involved in this review and said that Special Use Permits were unique circumstances that required insight and
judgment, not hard and fast rules. She added that the Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance, in some instances,
applies the Special Use Permit process to areas that did not really deal with use and as a result, the Town
Council is sometimes charged with the responsibility of granting or denying relief from development regulations
through the Special Use Permit process.
Ms. Zanon further explained that a variance is a relief from a development regulation. In general, a variance did
not deal with the use of the land. The use of the land was allowed, but the builder did not want to build to Town
regulations and therefore a variance deals with how the land was developed. A variance granted permission to
do something normally prohibited by regulations, such as building higher than allowed or reducing a setback.
She noted that variance application filing fees were substantially increased earlier this year to discourage
variance applications and said that for builders that choose to apply, variances should be difficult to obtain.
ZACouncil Packets\2006\Rl 1-2-06\10-10-06 Work Study Minutes.doc Page 1 of 7
Ms. Zanon advised that one way to more strictly enforce the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance was to
have criteria in place upon which to base decisions. She said that variances go before the Board of Adjustment
and the members evaluate all of the cases that come before them based on four criteria (contained in the full
report on file in the Office of the Town Clerk). She pointed out that the Board of Adjustment was an appointed,
non -political, quasi-judicial body charged with the responsibility of reviewing cases based on the findings of
fact per the four specific criteria. When the Town Council was asked to make these decisions, they did so with
non -written standards or criteria that could change over time as elected officials change.
Ms. Zanon stated that staff reviewed the Town's entire Zoning Ordinance and identified regulations that could
be amended to help the Council more strictly uphold the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. She noted that
there were ten proposed regulations before the Council this evening and said that nine of the regulations were
currently Special Use Permits or waivers that could potentially become variances. One of the ten regulations
was actually a permitted use in the Zoning Ordinance for only one specific Zoning District that this could also
become a variance.
Ms. Zanon referred to the first eight regulations contained in the Staff Report and noted that these represent
instances that the Council rarely see. Only one had come before the Council in the past. She discussed the ninth
regulation dealing with Cut/Fill Waivers for fills or cuts over 10 feet, and stated that staff recognized the
importance of the Council reviewing these types of waivers for new subdivision development. She added that
staff suggested that Cut/Fill Waivers be placed into two separate categories: (1) Small lot development and (2)
lots of five acres or more and subdivision development. She said that the proposed regulation change would
reduce the number of Cut/Fill applications that came before the Council. Only significant waivers that could
affect substantial development in the Town would go before the Council and added that based on applicant
history, the proposed amendment would help the Council to more strictly enforce the General Plan and the
Zoning Ordinance.
Ms. Zanon also discussed the final regulation, #9, the R1-10 Swimming pool setback exclusion on a street side
yard, and said that this was currently an approved ordinance within the Town's Zoning Ordinance. She noted
that only one district was subject to this regulation (R1-10) and all other residential Zoning Districts had to go
before the Board of Adjustment to ask for the same exclusion. Staff could not determine why this one property
was given this exclusion and recommended that everyone be required to go before the Board of Adjustment and
that the exclusion become a variance.
Ms. Zanon indicated her willingness to respond to questions from the Council.
Councilmember Archambault asked whether the R1-10 exclusion was granted for swimming pools because of
the small size of the lots and Ms. Zanon noted that the Town actually has two Zoning Districts smaller than the
R1-10 (R1-8 and R1-6).
Councilmember Leger said that after reviewing the materials provided by staff, he felt comfortable moving most
of the items into a variance category but was uncomfortable with height setbacks and Cut/Fill. He added that it
had been his experience with respect to heights that although staff s intent was well intended, oftentimes staff
decisions with respect to buildings were based on technical criteria and staff was left "out of the loop" with
respect to citizen input. He requested that the other members of the Council consider this point as they move
forward.
Ms. Zanon commented that the regulation before the Council this evening dealt with the Town's Multi -Zoning
District and the height waiver was when they allowed non-residential buildings to build in the Residential
Zoning District. The height waiver that comes before the Council was strictly for a commercial -type building in
a Multi -Family Residential Zoning District. She added that the decision was currently in the Council's hands
and if they change it to a variance, staff would still not make the decision, there would still be another body, the
Board of Adjustment, rendering the decisions based on the four criteria.
ZACouncil Packets\2006\R11-2-06\10-10-06 Work Study Minutes.doc Page 2 of 7
Councilmember Leger stated that the Board of Adjustment performs excellent work but, like staff, did not have
the benefit of hearing citizen input.
Discussion ensued relative to staff's efforts to assist the Council in enforcing the Town's General Plan/Zoning
Ordinances; the fact that the Council receives a large number of Cut/Fill applications (12 within the last 5
years); the fact that 9 of the 12 applications, according to the proposed revision, would have gone before the
Board of Adjustment rather than the Council; the fact that single-family properties were singled out because
those properties had already been through a strict subdivision review, which the Council reviewed and voted on,
and it had already been determined that those lots met the Town's regulations and were buildable; the fact that
"big planning," whether it be Residential, Single -Family, Multi -Family or Commercial, would still come before
Council; and the fact that based on the proposed regulation change, Cut/Fill waivers, such as the ones at Fire
Rock where the homes were built lower into the ground and cuts were not visible, would go before the Board of
Adjustment.
Mr. Pickering, responding to comments from Councilmember Schlum, stated that the residents and the Council
wanted ordinances to be enforced and that staff was torn between the residents' desire for strict ordinance
enforcement while granting some flexibility when it was for the good of the community. Councilmember
Schlum commented on the importance to retain the Council's flexibility to improve certain situations.
Councilmember Dickey asked whether applicants could appeal the decisions of the Board of Adjustment to the
Council if their request was denied.
Town Attorney Andrew McGuire responded that the Council could not appeal the Board's decisions as appeals
go before the Superior Court as the Court of last resort.
In response to a request from Mr. Pickering, Mr. McGuire stated the opinion that the Council would not want
the Board of Adjustment acting as the reviewing body for a decision of the Council, whether they were acting
administratively or legislatively. Once the Council rendered a decision it should not be appealable to the Board
of Adjustment.
Mr. McGuire responded to Councilmember Dickey's question and advised that if the Board of Adjustment
approved a variance, the Town could either accept the decision or could sue the Board to reverse the decision.
He said that at the present time, anything that went before the Board of Adjustment was final. They were the
last resort; that would be the case with Cut/Fill waivers for small lots (less than five acres). The "shift" was to
take the small lot Cut/Fill waivers and put them under the Board of Adjustment's process whereby they would
render the last decision and all appeals would go to the Superior Court.
Councilmember Leger stated that he believed what staff was trying to accomplish was excellent and he was in
agreement with everything on the matrix with the exception of height, Cut/Fills and setbacks. He reiterated that
neither staff nor the Board of Adjustment obtain the feedback that the Councilmembers receive when
controversial projects arise. He said that he was not comfortable relinquishing the connection between himself
and the citizenry. He added that he would like to move forward with the exceptions he recommended (removal
of the three items listed above).
Councilmember Archambault said that he did not have a problem allowing the Board of Adjustment to rule on
the smaller residential lots as long as the Council spent more time reviewing the plats. He suggested that they
schedule Work Study Sessions where the Council could actually look at each individual plat to obtain a clear
understanding of what the topography looks like, etc. He added that staff and/or the developer could provide
recommendations on how houses could be placed on the lots. He stated the opinion that this would be very
helpful to the Council and would avoid the approval of plats containing too many lots.
In response to a question from Councilmember Dickey, Mr. McGuire indicated his willingness to discuss
possible Proposition 207 implications at a later time in a non-public setting.
ZACouncil Packets\2006\Rl 1-2-06\10-10-06 Work Study Minutes.doc Page 3 of 7
Vice Mayor Kehe commented that citizens would ultimately hold the Council accountable for decisions made.
He expressed concerns regarding yielding authority to another body despite the fact that the Council will be held
accountable. He also agreed with Councilmember Leger's comments regarding building height, setbacks and
Cut/Fills. He added that to a lesser degree he also has concerns regarding 5.1 LGA (Clearing not in plan
conformance) and 4.01.E.3 (Extension of a non -conforming use). He said that he could live with the others and
might also be able to live with the latter two but he would not consider yielding authority to the Board of
Adjustment on the three listed by Councilmember Leger. He said that although he could not speak for the
Mayor, he would like to state that the Mayor had previously indicated opposition only to the Cut/Fill. The Vice
Mayor emphasized that the Council had the authority to "strictly enforce."
Councilmember McMahan agreed with the Vice Mayor's comments regarding the negative impacts associated
with diminishing the Council's authority.
Mr. Pickering summarized the Council's discussion and direction and stated that items 11.03.0 (Town Council
height waiver for Non -Residential Buildings in a Residential District); 11.03D (Town Council setback waiver
for Non -Residential Building in a Residential District and 5.1 LC.4 (Cut/Fill waiver for fills or cuts over 10 feet)
would be removed.
The Council concurred with Mr. Pickering's summarization and thanked staff for their presentation
AGENDA ITEM #3 — PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF THE 2006 BUSINESS VITALITY
PLAN BY FOUNTAIN HILLS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS VICE
PRESIDENT MARK MCDERMOTT AND MITCH NICHOLS, CONSULTANT FOR THE PROTECT.
Frank Ferara, Chief Executive Officer of the Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Council and introduced
Mark McDermott, Vice Chairman of the Chamber's Board of Directors/Consulting Manager of the Visitor's
Bureau and Mitch Nichols, consultant for the project. Mr. Ferara provided a brief overview of the history and
reasons behind the development of the Chamber's 2006 Business Vitality Plan (on file in the Office of the Town
Clerk). He discussed the composition of the Advisory Committee that was formed and noted that the
Committee determined the importance of looking at the entire region rather than simply the Town (Fountain
Hills, the Yavapai Nation and McDowell Mountain Regional Park). He also discussed outreach efforts that were
initiated and the fact that considerable input was received. He said that they would like the partnership that
already exists between the Town, the Tribe and the Chamber to continue, expand and grow stronger.
Mr. McDermott addressed the Council and stated that the process had been an exciting one geared toward
enhancing and improving the business vitality of the community in a strategic planning type of fashion that can
be collaborative with the Strategic Plan of the Town. He said that it was determined early on that the Town
itself should maintain the lead pertaining to economic development in general (commercial development in
particular) and the Chamber of Commerce should play the lead role in the area of tourism. He added that the
consultant, Mr. Mitch Nichols, would provide a brief overview of the Plan itself and outlined Mr. Nichols'
extensive experience in this particular area.
Mr. Nichols addressed the Council and stated that more and more communities were recognizing "civic
tourism" and the important role the visitor market could play as an economic base and as a method to expand the
quality of life aspects a community could offer to its residents. He emphasized the importance of a cooperative
effort between the various entities to achieve maximum benefits. He discussed the various input processes that
were implemented and said that they used the input and data received to move towards a strategic planning
process. He highlighted a PowerPoint presentation relative to the Plan and discussed the Mission of the
Chamber of Commerce: (1) To build deeper community understanding of the role of tourism and integration
with Fountain Hills' economy; (2) Enhance power and linkages of existing visitor assets and proactively expand
key opportunity areas and (3) Develop an inviting destination environment where customer ser vice reinforces a
unique, small town ambiance and also discussed the goal tracts that were developed as a foundation for the Plan.
ZACouncil Packets\2006\R11-2-06\10-10-06 Work Study Minutes.doc Page 4 of 7
Discussion ensued relative to the Plan's various goals, objectives and proposed implementation plans.
Mr. Nichols emphasized the importance of the Town recognizing the opportunity it has to utilize the visitor
market for both an economic vitality and a quality of life purpose. He commented on the fact that Town
possessed amazing differentiated assets that were truly desired by the base that currently exists within the Valley
but noted that they were facing strong competition. He added that the integrated steps outlined in the proposal
are critical to develop a regional cooperative working relationship necessary to achieve optimum results.
Councilmember Archambault asked how successful the group has been in getting businesses to agree to remain
open later and providing visitors a better feel for the Town. Mr. Nichols replied that that is a consistent
challenge that many communities face. He said that with the whole "customer service training goal track,"
could help achieve a better customer "mind set." He added that they had to try to achieve a community -wide
"buy in" where the businesses agreed to stay open on certain days at certain times. He said that the Chamber
could work with the businesses in an effort to achieve some type of consensus.
In response to a question from Councilmember Archambault, Mark McDermott addressed the Council and
reported that the residents have expressed a lot of enthusiasm regarding the enhancements that were being made
to Avenue of the Fountain and how it ultimately started to "jumpstart" some of the aspirations with regard to
Town Center development. He added that the timing of the project was ideal as far as "kicking off" this
particular plan.
Councilmember Dickey questioned what the Council's role was in the process and Mr. Nichols said that he saw
the Council and the Town itself playing a very important role in talking about the long-term economic
orientation of the Town and the important role that tourism could play to reduce the Town's tax burden and
enhance the overall quality of life in Fountain Hills. He also saw a very close orientation between the Chamber
and the Town as the messaging was put together and stressed the importance of coordination between the two
entities.
Additional discussion ensued relative to the fact that reactions to the improvements have been positive but a
continuing educational program is imperative to overall success; the fact that communication is an "uphill
battle;" and the importance of alerting the public to the fact that a significant portion of the Town's budget was
derived from economic activity.
Mr. Pickering stated that he would like to summarize the areas where the Town should play a role in tourism:
(1) Approve the new resort to improve tourism capacity; (2) the addition of more directional signage leading
into Town; (3) Build or allow to be built trails for easy pedestrian access into the environment (washes,
McDowell Mountain Park); (4) Decide on long-term funding for tourism; (5) Improve access to employees,
improving the Town's customer service base (for example a connection to Mesa from Fort McDowell if they
expand a road) and this would improve the Town's ability to hire a workforce; (6) Work with the Chamber to
conduct workshops to improve customer service and (7) Be selective about what goes in downtown. He said
that there may be more items but these were the main ones he had identified that the Town directly impacted.
Mr. Nichols concurred.
Councilmember Archambault commented that the presentation touched upon a possible Visitors Center on Shea
Boulevard and questioned whether there had been any discussion about locating the Visitor Center at The
Overlook, just east of the Fry's Shopping Center. Mr. Nichols replied that discussions relative to that issue had
been broad up to this point and no specific location has been identified.
Discussion ensued relative to Fort McDowell's role in the process, including native stories/experiences and
cultural environments; the fact that the tribe was very innovative and a welcomed component of the group; the
g fact that the tribe had made a definitive commitment to tourism -related destination development as their primary
future development on their land, and the importance of being "at the table" with them and vice versa to ensure
that plans complement each other and go "hand in hand."
ZACouncil Packets\2006\R11-2-06\10-10-06 Work Study Minutes.doc Page 5 of 7
In response to questions from the Vice Mayor, Mr. Pickering advised that Planning staff has been working with
the developer of the property located at the corner of Palisades and Shea for quite some time on the construction
of an approximate 200-250-room resort with ballrooms, etc. He stated that the Tourism Plan emphasizes the
importance of increasing the Town's tourism capacity and expressed the opinion that the resort would
accomplish this goal should it be approved in the long run. He discussed the limited hotel/resort capacity that
currently exists within the Town. He also discussed long-term funding and explained that currently the
Chamber came before the Council each year and requested funding. During difficult times, that funding had
been reduced. He said it was his understanding that the desire was to develop a more structured long-term
funding source so that the entities counting on that funding to market the Town, Fort McDowell and the area,
could make their plans.
Councilmember Leger asked Mr. Pickering what he viewed the role to be between economic development and
tourism. He said that there was the issue of service and the issue of product — not only do they need businesses
providing service, they need the right mix of businesses. He asked whether a partnership existed between the
Chamber and the Town and if so, what was the Town's role.
Mr. Pickering replied that economic development was the Town's responsibility and emphasized that the Town
made the decisions on the various projects (zoning, incentives, etc.). He said that developers would want to talk
to the people who were making those decisions. He added that as far as tourism, one of the things that towns
and municipalities did not do very well was marketing. It had a lot to do with the public's perception whether
dollars were being spent wisely. He said that Chambers does a wonderful of job of marketing and that was a
crucial part of their responsibilities.
Councilmember Leger asked who was responsible for recruiting the right product for the right destination to
make all of this work so that the right product provided the right service at the right time. He stated the opinion
that appeared to be a "missing link." Mr. Pickering disagreed and responded that it was not a "missing link" and
recruitment was the Town's responsibility. He added that the Town's economic development duties and
responsibilities were somewhat limited when it came to recruitment because they were very much "facilitation."
Typically, economic development organizations were marketing/facilitation/attraction. He pointed out that the
Town was somewhat limited because, for example, they only had five parcels over five acres in size. He
acknowledged that Town staff did attend the shopping center conference held each year and that this was where
deals were made. He reiterated that the Town's inventory was very limited. A somewhat large development
could be built downtown (100,00 square feet in size) but that it was really not that large from an industry
standard.
Discussion ensued relative to vacant storefronts and the fact that they were typically 1,000 to 1,500 square feet
in size and the importance of identifying the right products for those locations and the importance of attracting
"local tourists."
Mr. Ferrara discussed implementation of the Plan and said that they had already formed an Action Plan Team
that would review each of the priorities and prioritize them and that a "grassroots" program would be put into
place. He emphasized the importance of ensuring that the partnerships grow stronger and requested
commitment from the Council that the Town and business community would work together for the benefit of
everyone concerned.
Councilmember Dickey stated that another component was infrastructure/traffic/public safety related and they
needed to show cooperation in those areas over the long haul as well.
Vice Mayor Kehe thanked everyone for the presentation and valuable input.
THE
CONFERENCE ROOM.)
Y
ZACouncil Packets\2006\R11-2-06\10-10-06 Work Study Minutes.doc Page 6 of 7
AGENDA ITEM #5 — ROLL CALL AND VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. PURSUANT
TO A.R.S. 438-431-03.A.4 — THE COUNCIL MAY HOLD AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR
DISCUSSION OR CONSULTATION WITH THE TOWN'S ATTORNEYS IN ORDER TO CONSIDER
ITS POSITION AND INSTRUCT THE TOWN'S ATTORNEYS REGARDING THE COUNCIL'S
POSITION REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION (SPECIFICALLY, LUKENDA HOLDINGS V.
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS).
Councilmember Archambault MOVED to adjourn the Work Study Session and convene the Executive Session
and Councilmember Leger SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present (6-
0).
The Work Study Session adjourned at 6:45 p.m. and the Executive Session convened at 6:51 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM #6 — ADJOURNMENT.
Councilmember McMahan MOVED to adjourn the Executive Session and Councilmember Schlum
SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present. The Executive Session
adjourned at 7:31 p.m.
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
By V" -
Wally N chols, Mayor
ATTEST AND
PREPARED BY:
Bevelyn J en er, Town Clerk
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Work Study
Session/Executive Session held by the Town Council of Fountain Hills on the loth day of October 2006. 1
further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present.
DATED this 2ND day of November 2006.
11
C : �%L?•
ZACouncil Packets\2006\Rl 1-2-06\10-10-06 Work Study Minutes.doc Page 7 of 7