DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES

May 18, 2006

Members Present
Ben Barcon
Rus Brock
Gary Corcoran
Herb Hacker
John Hart
Barbara Koffron
Scott Mardian
Ken Roth
Greg Russell
Paul Scott
Patricia Thornham
Darrell Wilson

Members Absent
Bernie Deutsch
Carlo Gegen
Pete Hemingway
Melanie Laboy
Herman Orcutt
Danny Ortega

Staff
Karen Beckley, DSD
Mike Hamblin, Law
Don Herb, Streets
Derek Horn, DSD
Larry Litchfield, DSD
Joanne Owens, DSD
Cindy Stotler, DSD
Brad Walldorf, WTR Dept
John Watson, Fire

Ex-Officio's Present
Jim Baughman, Planning
Chaun Hill, Streets
Aaron LaRoque, Water Services
Patrick Ravenstein, NSD
Tom Wandrie, DSD

Ex-Officio's Absent

Others in Attendance

CALL TO ORDER
Barbara Koffron DAB Chairperson, convened the meeting at 3:10 p.m.

Approval of April 20, 2006 Minutes:
Motion was made by Herb Hacker, seconded by Paul Scott, to approve the meeting minutes of April 20, 2006.
Motion carried unanimously.

Call to the Public (No Board Discussion):
None

Update, Discussion, and Possible Action on the Development Services Department Financial Status Update:
Cindy Stotler reported on the involvement that some of the Development Services Staff had in a television program called Univision 33 a Su Lado or 33 on your Side. They featured the Development Services Department in April 2006 and 14 Spanish speaking staff volunteered to participate. They filmed at the 2nd floor counter and featured segments on residential building permits, residential inspections, and residential citations and violations in the field. Ms. Stotler stated that a 4-hour telethon was done at the station. The same DSD staff participated and answered phones regarding residential permits. She stated that this was a very positive program and is looking forward to participating in future years.
Cindy Stotler gave a brief power point presentation explaining the financial status of the Development Services Department.

Presentation and Discussion on the Development Services Staff Report:
Derek Horn gave a brief power point presentation showing recent performance measures within DSD.

Update and Discussion on the Street and Sidewalk Improvements in Old Phoenix Subdivisions:
Don Herp, Deputy Street Transportation Director, stated that the in November 1998, the City Council approved a Capital Construction Fund to be used for City infrastructure improvements. One of the uses of the fund, was the installation of sidewalks in developed areas that did not have sidewalks. The program has been used to put sidewalks on local and collector streets in areas that have existing curb and gutter but have no sidewalks. Since 1998, the funding has varied over the years, but generally the City has been able to complete two to three miles of sidewalks each year. Lately this has increasingly become more difficult due to the large increase in materials costs.

Mr. Herp stated that there is more pressure on other programs in the Streets Capital Improvement Program, so there has been some shift in funding by management from the sidewalk program to other programs. In order to get the most effective use of the dollars that Streets has, they go through a prioritization process.

They look at the street classification and attempt to target funds to collector streets. Also, they look at the availability of right-of-way, which Council did not authorize Streets Department to purchase right-of-way for this program. If Streets gets in a situation where there is no right-of-way, then they will be asking the residents who are requesting the sidewalk to donate the right-of-way that they need.

Mr. Herp stated that one of the drawbacks of putting in sidewalks in developed areas is that behind the curbs and gutters, residences have installed landscaping. Sometimes very elaborate landscaping, decorative walls, water meters, fire hydrants, power polls, and streetlights. Many obstructions would be run into when attempting to implement this program. Streets would always like neighborhood support at a very high level. He stated that if they have a request for a sidewalk, they would ask for a 70% approval by the property owners, which is not usually given. Many residents prefer the rural character of a residential street without sidewalks.

Mr. Herp stated that budgetary pressures have reduced the level of funding in this program. With the rise in concrete construction costs, it’s become very expensive to install sidewalks. From the time a sidewalk is requested, it takes approximately 24 to 36 months for completion.

Update and Discussion on IGA’s (Intergovernmental Agreements) between the City of Phoenix and Marciopa County:
Mike Hamblin, City Attorney, stated that a couple of years ago Maricopa County staff and City of Phoenix staff met to discuss the County’s desire to build buildings within the boundaries of the City of Phoenix using County and not City building codes.

A different interpretation is located in the Arizona Revised Statues, Section 34.461A, which states, “Public buildings shall be construed in compliance with the applicable building, plumbing, electrical, fire prevention, and mechanical codes adopted by the city, town, county, or prior district to which the building is located.”

He stated that the County interpreted that statue to means that “a County” could issue it’s own permits for any county zoning within the City of Phoenix. The city interpreted that statute to give the city, sole jurisdiction to issue construction permits within the City of Phoenix. These was discussed for several months and negotiate an intergovernmental agreement to permit governmental entities to negotiate agreements whereby one or the other of the governmental entities gives up a governmental power or gives that to another governmental entity.

Mr. Hamblin stated that an agreement was reached to allow the County to build buildings on county owned land, but within the geographical boundaries in the City of Phoenix. They would issue their own permits, complete their own inspections, issue their own certificates of occupancy. The City of Phoenix had a few stipulations, which the county is required to follow. Those being, the city’s sprinkler ordinance, along with a number of provisions would be adhered to under the city’s fire code. The county would also need to build their buildings in compliance with a nationally accepted building/fire code. The county agreed to do so.

After a conclusion was reached, the County Board of Supervisors approved the agreement, then went to the City Council. The City Council has passed a resolution on this intergovernmental agreement.

Update, Discussion, and Possible Action on the Incentive Package for Residential Fire Sprinklers:
Ms. Koffron stated that the Fire Safety Advisory Board put together a few design freedoms for single family subdivisions that are totally protected by automatic fire sprinklers. If builders use any of the following design freedoms, codes need to be written in the Fire Codes, Streets Department, Development Services, Planning Department, and the Water Department. She stated that the DAB Technical Subcommittee needs to meet with staff from each department to work together to put create a matrix/code language on the new codes.

Before this issue can move forward, the Fire Safety Advisory Board is requesting that the Development Advisory Board put together some language. They are in the process of speaking with some of the Home Builders who are already installing residential fire sprinklers in entire subdivisions on their own.

Motion was made by Ken Roth, seconded by Rus Brock, to move the Incentive Package for Residential Fire Sprinklers to the DAB Technical Subcommittee for the creation of code language.
Motion carried unanimously.

Discussion Regarding Future DAB Agenda Items:
Ms. Koffron would like information on required backflow preventors on all commercial (13R and 13 Fire Sprinkle Systems/Class 1 and 2). She stated that in the past class 1 and 2, fire sprinkler systems have not required backflow preventors be installed provided that there was maintenance on the systems and that the systems were sized to allows the installation of a backflow preventor. Ms. Koffron would like clarification on this issue.

Adjournment

Motion was made by John Hart , seconded by Paul Scott , to adjourn the May 18, 2006 meeting.
Motion carried unanimously

Meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m.

Derek Horn, P.E. CBO
DSD Deputy Director

Minutes Prepared by:
Carole Borrego, Secretary III

Last Modified on 06/15/2006 16:41:26