CITY OF PEORIA, ARIZONA PINE ROOM February 21, 2006 A Study Session Meeting of the City Council of the City of Peoria, Arizona was convened at 8401 W. Monroe Street, in open and public session at 5:01 p.m. Members Present: Vice Mayor Bob Barrett; Councilmembers Cathy Carlat, Patricia Dennis, Joan Evans, Vicki Hunt, and Carlo Leone. Members Absent: Mayor John Keegan Other Municipal Officials Present: Terrence Ellis, City Manager; Susan Thorpe, Deputy City Manager; John Wenderski, Deputy City Manager; Neil Mann, Acting Deputy City Manager; Mary Jo Kief, City Clerk; Constance Copeland, Assistant City Clerk; Steve Kemp, City Attorney; Dave Moody, David Nakagawara, Jeff Tyne, Steve Prokopek, Grady Miller, J.P. de la Montaigne, Chad Daines, Phil Gardner and Kirk Haines. Audience: Approximately 12 individuals were present. Subject for Discussion only: Possible Streetscape Plan Options for Southern Part of City Terry Ellis, City Manager, provided an introduction of the Streetscape Plan options for the southern part of the City. This item was presented at the last Council workshop in September 2005 and became part of the twelve-month policy agenda. At the direction of Council, this item was brought back for discussion in the Study Session. Dave Moody, Engineering Director, reported on the Arterial System in South Peoria. The streets under discussion are south of Bell Road. The goal of the review is to develop a strategy addressing possible methods and associated costs to correct identified streetscape deficiencies. The issues surround side walks, landscape, utility deficiencies and how to improve the streetscape for older parts of the City. David Nakagawara, Acting Community Development Director, reported that areas built prior to 1995 did not have common walls, landscape themes, and had non-standard rights-of-way. There were no standards for the City to require a developer to build specific structures. Sub-dividers were not required to place utilities underground. There were no standards set for operation and maintenance costs, side walk width and drainage was a problem. Today, if a developer came into the City there are specific standards. Mr. Nakagawara highlighted esthetic and safety issues and showed pictures of landscapes that take too much maintenance containing non-native vegetation that is irrigation intensive. Potential options for improvements where discussed. Mr. Nakagawara explained new developments reflect a more unified type of wall design. In response to questions from Councilmember Hunt, Staff reported if the landscaping is in the City right-of-way, it is the responsibility of the City. The wall is the responsibility of the homeowner or HOA. J. P. de la Montaigne, Community Services Director, stated that the City added $250,000 to the budget for five years for landscaping. When they found a development that had no curb landscaping or sidewalks the City improved those areas, $1.2 million was spent on that program. Mr. de la Montaigne explained that moving utilities underground cost approximately $2 million per mile. Capital Improvement Program recommendations for major arterials will be presented to Council in April or May. Mayor Keegan asked staff to discuss the policy for participation of City utilities, such as SRP, APS, phone and irrigation utilities. Staff reported that during a widening project utilities must pay to move the utilities that are in the way at no cost to the City. However, in an overhead utility situation, the City must pay a portion of the cost. Now developers are required to bear the cost of meeting City standards and give right-of-way to the City. On any of the capital projects there will be an on-going operations and maintenance cost and lighting maintenance cost. Public Meetings will be held to gather input from adjacent property owners when the City has completed 20% of the design concept. City standards will be maintained; however, if there are multiple options for specific landscape material, the City will take the property owner’s recommendation into consideration. Councilmember Carlat inquired about the $250,000 per year, if that was regular or upgrading maintenance, staff responded that it was upgrading. It was Capitol Improvement Project on landscaping for right of ways. The money was spent on landscaping, sidewalks and irrigation when it was not originally built. In respond to questions from Councilmember Dennis, Staff responded that neighborhood groups may be able to form a Maintenance Improvement District (MID). Council discussed the difficulty of creating a MID. Council requested that the City provide homeowners with basic information if they wanted to create a MID. Staff confirmed that the schedule for projects will be in the Capitol Improvement Program. In response to questions from Councilmember Hunt, Staff confirmed that Varney improvements will be independent. Today’s discussion is on the arterials; the Varney improvements will have to come out of some other project. The improvements will conform to the same guidelines. Staff explained while there was no provision for sound walls; the under ground of drainage ditches, installation of sidewalks and street lights are to be included. In response to questions from Councilmember Hunt regarding if staff were considering medians on major streets like Thunderbird Road. Staff confirmed that the City normally reviews arterials. The standard arterial is a two-one-two (two lanes in each direction) with the divided portion in the middle. Mayor Keegan asked if there were any other questions or comments. There were none. Mayor Keegan declared a recess at 5:32 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 5:50 p.m. Successful Planning Program Chad Daines, Planning Manager, presented an overview on the Proposed Planning Division Work Plan for 2006-07. Mr. Daines reviewed the ingredients of a successful planning program: Mayor and Council support, wisdom and leadership, Planning Commission recommendations and professional planning staff. Mr. Daines reported on the completed projects for 2004 – 2005. The first project discussed was the Desert Lands and Conservation Ordinance. This required a comprehensive analysis during project review of sensitive desert areas, completion of native plant inventory and revegatation, established wash protection setbacks and wash protection standards as well as updated hillside standards. This Ordinance received the Arizona Planning Award Statewide Award for Best New Ordinance of 2005. During 2004-2005, a new ordinance was adopted regulating Big Box Development Standards for large retail uses establishing locational criteria and enhancing design and parking standards. Another ordinance adopted was the PAD ordinance which updated standards and established project size criteria. In response to questions from Councilmember Dennis, Mr. Daines explained that Peoria has standards for parking lots. Those standards require a certain amount of pedestrian walkways through the parking lot. Additional requirements beyond the normal requirements include large canopies and alternatively double rows of trees. In response to questions from Council, Mr. Daines explained the benefits of the Hillside Ordinance explaining that the developers are willing to preserve large spaces and give them to the City as long as they get credit for the donated land. Mr. Daines clarified that there are large open spaces of open, contiguous areas which are important so that wildlife will not be trapped on an island. This will not just be mountain tops. Mr. Daines reported that in each of the larger scale areas there are public and private trails. Mr. Daines reported on the 75th Avenue and Thunderbird Road Annexation area and the Tierra Del Rio Annexation incorporating 2000 homes and a large commercial area on Peoria’s western border. Zoning maps that have been converted to Geographic Information Systems (GIS) format are placed on the web for greater accessibility. Mr. Daines reported that the Historic Preservation Master Plan Ordinance established the framework for future historic districts. The Planning Department is in the process of updating the historic survey which will provide data about where historic districts could be formed. Mr. Daines explained that the master plan had been reviewed and approved by the State Historic Preservation Office. The City is surveying the downtown area looking for streets that have a number of historic buildings to form a historic district as well as an individual landmark. When the City staff reviewed the Old Town Mixed Use Zoning District in the revitalization plan, the City found zoning standards that work well in suburban areas; however, downtown needed unique development standards to promote infill. Mr. Daines reported that the Non-Residential Design Review Standards Ordinance adopted in 1997 was updated for design standards and the scoring system was eliminated. Mr. Daines explained that most Cities have design review approval. Peoria Staff collectively looks at the design. Applicants may appeal to the Design Appeals Board. The structure of that review is more formal and allows input from the developer. In response to Councilmember Dennis, Mr. Daines replied project review is done at the same time as the site plan review and takes approximately four months. Mr. Daines continued that Citizen Participation Ordinance established required community meetings, enhanced, notification requirements, and new legal protest requirements. Mr. Daines outlined a variety of miscellaneous text amendments that include: * Parking * Landscaping * Noise walls * Cellular towers * Temporary Use Permits * Land Use Matrix Loop 303 Specific Area Plan covered 32 square miles of north Peoria area, established future business park and commercial core areas, and established park mixed use categories. The 2006-2007 General Plan projects include: * Lake Pleasant Parkway Specific Area Plan * Annual General Plan Amendment Process * Re-publish General Plan * Central Peoria Specific Plan * Economic Development Element * Water Resources Element * Planning Area Boundary Update * Mixed Use Land Use Categories * Lone Mountain/ Lake Pleasant Land Use Plan 2006-2007 Zoning Ordinance Amendments include: * Single-family Design Review * Group Homes Update * Mixed Use Ordinance * Dark Sky Ordinance Photometric Study Requirement * Non-Conforming Use Ordinance * Old-Town Mixed Use Ordinance * Sign Code Update * Lake Pleasant Park Design Theme Ordinance * Design Review Photo Reference Manual 2006-2007 Old Town Projects include: * Grand Avenue Pedestrian Project * 84th Avenue Streetscape Project * Osuna Park Project * Washington/83rd Streetscape * Historic Square Master Plan 2006-2007 Historic Preservation include: * Update Historic Resource Survey * District Designations * Landmark Designations * Site Steward Program 2006-2007 Annexation include: * County Island Annexation Strategy (Phase 1 and Phase 2) * West Side Annexation In response to questions from Councilmember Carlat, Mr. Daines reported that through the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program the City is standardizing the requirements for speed bumps or islands in neighborhood structures with more specificity. Using traffic studies on projected speed and traffic volume, various enhancements could be incorporated in the design. Discussion ensued regarding the ordinance requirement for restaurant patios adjacent to residential areas as well as the concern over the location next to family-oriented businesses. The proposed sound ordinance was also discussed. Staff responded that the conditional use permit gives the City continuing jurisdiction. If a restaurant failed to maintain the use, the conditional use permit could be revoked. Outdoor patios in a commercial district require a conditional use permit. In response to questions from Councilmember Hunt, Mr. Daines responded that 84th Avenue Street Scape is a capital funding issue that will be back for review in the Capital Improvement Project for determination of funding by Council. The City is responsible for 10% of the funds; 90% are federal funds. Terry Ellis, City Manager, discussed concerns about the placement of the large square green electric boxes in the right of way. He noted that these decisions are made by the utility companies and not the City. He asked Staff to look at the possibility of painting, placement or screening to improve the design. Council concurred to put this issue into the Planning Work Program. In response to questions from Councilmember Dennis, Staff responded the non-conforming ordinance needs to be revised for issues beyond annexation. In response to questions from Councilmember Evans regarding a specific new property owner who collects and restores cars on his property, Staff advised that the area is zoned agricultural. Staff will take a look at what is being stored on agricultural zoned property; screening may be required. Mayor suggested a review of Title 28 (Motor Vehicle Ordinance) which gives specific exemptions for farm vehicles and is specific to type, size and use of those vehicles should be renewed. Council concurred to put this issue into the Planning Work Program. Adjournment: Being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was duly adjourned at 6:37 p.m. ____ __________________________________ John C. Keegan, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ Mary Jo Kief, City Clerk City Council Study Session Minutes February 21, 2006, 5:00 p.m. Page 7 of 7