City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. I'm going to call us to order.

So I see we have Larry, are you giving the invocation? So we'll have the invocation by Larry Tracy, followed by the pledge for Council Member Yonkers. Heavenly Father, we are grateful for the opportunity to gather tonight for the purpose of serving the people of the Fatherland.

We ask your wisdom and guidance for our mayor, city council, and city staff as they make decisions for the community experiencing tremendous growth and change. Give them wisdom as they plan for our roads, water, public safety, economic development, airport, and infrastructure that will serve Buckeye for generations to come. We're thankful for the businesses investing here, the jobs being created, and the new opportunities coming to our community. May our growth be thoughtful, responsible, and always focused on improving the quality of life for those who call Buckeye home. During construction, any challenges come with that. Give us patience and help us remember that we are building not simply a larger city, but a stronger community. us, our families, our schools, our first responders, our businesses, and all who serve this community. And tonight, grant this council wisdom, discernment, respect for one another, and clarity in every decision before them. Amen.

Amen.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,

indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Madam Clerk, can we have the roll, please?

Council Member Yonker? Here. Council Member Berry?

Here.

Council Member Hagestad?

Here. I think he said here.

Council Member Beard? Yes. Council Member Hustis? Here. Vice Mayor Goodman?

Present.

Mayor Orsborn is absent.

OK.

Item two, comments from the public. Members of the audience may comment on any non-agenda item of interest. And we have a couple of speakers. John Testerman. So just speak into the microphone. It'll pick you up and then the light'll come on and you have three minutes.

Got it. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I commute daily on Indians, uh, school road. And during rush hour, there are large delays of sometimes five minutes or more at each of the four-way stop intersections from Perryville road to loop 303. This stretch of road is designated for an update by the Maricopa association of government's transportation improvement project. program by the city of Buckeye under MAG TIP ID 7266. The plan as it stands calls for road widening and creating five more signalized intersections. Instead of traffic signals, creating roundabouts for the arterial to arterial intersections could be a large reduction in traffic accidents and injuries from traffic accidents while maintaining the ability for a large amount of traffic flow to include large freight vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists. The latest Buckeye Transportation Master Plan highlights crash locations and serious injury or fatal crash locations. Both are clustered around artillery roads and the intersections between artillery roads. With widened streets and a long network of traffic signals, Indian School Road has potential to be another dangerous area where drivers speed, run red lights, and where fatal accidents are just waiting to happen. Goal S11 of the Imagine Buckeye 2040 states that Buckeye will have a roadway system that is safe and efficient. Converting these four-way stops into roundabouts instead of traffic lights can achieve this effect. Conflicts at roundabouts are far fewer, happen at much lower speeds of 15 to 30 miles an hour, and happen at a much less severe angle, usually being side swipe crashes rather than T-bones or head-on collisions. According to the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, roundabouts have a 78% reduction in injury accidents compared to signalized intersections. The daily traffic for Indian School Road between Perryville Road and Loop 303 is about 10,000 vehicles a day. Single lane roundabouts can easily handle up to 15,000 vehicles per day and potentially up to 25 to 30,000 vehicles per day under certain conditions. In the Indian School Road case for future proofing and to eliminate a lane merge prior to the roundabout, a two lane roundabout may be needed which can handle up to 30,000 vehicles per day acceptably and potentially up to 40,000. Multilane roundabouts don't quite have the same safety record as single lane roundabouts due to the increased complexity and increased conflict points, but the accidents that do happen still occur at a low speed and at a low impact angle, making them still safer than a conventional traffic signal. Roundabout designs that keep pedestrians and bikers safer also possible like a ramp from the bike lane up to a widened sidewalk which then crosses the main road at least a car length away from the main roundabout for increased visibility and driver reaction time. For large trucks, options exist such as wider lanes allowing trucks to straddle two lanes of a multi-lane roundabout or having a truck apron in the center area where the trailer can roll over. Before committing to traffic signals, please conduct an intersection control evaluation of modern roundabouts versus traffic signals through that corridor, including factors such as safety, peak hour delay, future traffic demand, pedestrian and bicycle usage, freight usage, and construction and maintenance costs. We can get this right the first time when upgrading these intersections so we don't have to have several bad accidents and then return to the drawing board after the fact. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Have you spoken with Mr. Willett, our traffic engineer? Is he here? OK, we can get you that information. Thank you very much for your time. Next, we have Kenneth Valier. If you'll just state your name for the record and the light will come on when you start talking. Okay, the floor is yours.

Thank you. My name is Kenneth Valyer. I have been a resident for Buckeye for a little over 18 years now. I enjoy Buckeye and I'm an active community person serving both as a teacher and a leader at my church and in the heart of this community. I have raised my three sons here. Lately the quality of living in my neighborhood has taken a turn for the worse. interrupting peace of mind, concentration, and sleep, and overall health. Before I begin, as you listen to my story, please ask yourself this reflective question. Are we making the quality of life better and procedures more clear for our Buckeye residents? At least in this one issue. My issue today is in regards to the lack of process for correcting and receiving feedback regarding excessive and nuisance dog barking. My next-door neighbor has a pit bull mixed dog they keep outside. Around mid-evening, it emerges from the heat to bark literally at anything and everything, from me taking out the trash to people walking by on the sidewalk. This is easily 200 to 300 barks or more every evening. This has been an ongoing issue since they moved in several years ago. For reference, a long time ago prior to this issue, I once had a neighbor that lived behind me, and their dog had barked much like this current one. Back then I had called the non-emergency number. The police came out. I believe they warned them several times and eventually on the third time they came out, they heard the barking themselves and they sighted them. And that issue was taken care of. Apparently this is not the process any longer. I've called numerous times into the not emergency number to please not warn or cite this newer neighbor. At first they've said things like they didn't hear the barking or they did a drive by. Sometimes they parked further down the street where my heart, my house would block the barking. And another time they called me back about two minutes after I placed the call and left me a message that they'd already driven by. Um, by the way, that was one year ago at 2 30 AM on my birthday. when the dog barking woke me up. After continuing issues and lack of progress with this matter, a school resource officer at the school I work at finally leveled me and he said that this new city prosecutor is handling these type of issues now. Prosecutor wanted a petition signed by the neighbors before any action could be taken. So eventually, after much action on my part, trying to find different things that worked, I did get around to finding, getting a petition signed by all the neighbors that touched this property and some two over and some further over. In all, 14 people, nine neighbors, notarized, I had it notarized and filed a petition along with the letter with the police on Monday, April 13th. I met with the officers and Parking lot, it breaks plus, so my neighbor wouldn't suspect me turning him in, and they would later come by and cite him. Well, that didn't happen either. The officer explained that the prosecutor believed the accused had the right to face their accuser in court, and then I would hear something from the prosecutor's office. Well, it's been five months since I filed the paperwork. Dog barking continues. Quality of life has been reduced. I received nothing in the email, no feedback. Here's my recommendation. The prosecutor wants to take over this process, then he needs to own the process from cradle to grave and respond more quickly to residents' quality of life so it doesn't suffer. This is serious. Some people have underlying health issues. All people rely on their rest so they can be productive citizens, and some here in Buckeye. To go five months with zero acknowledgments suggests a non-existent process. I feel this process has been ridiculously long, complicated, and ultimately not resolved my issue. I estimate 45,000 dog barks later and in the past year over 100,000 bought dog barks. Anyhow, thank you for hearing my concerns today and I look forward to someone being appointed to remove the obstacles on this matter going forward. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments and I know in a conversation I had earlier, Chief Sanders would like to speak with you.

Yeah, we did actually touch base before this, so that was helpful. Very good.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

And Michael Nueces. And state your name for the record, and the clock will start when you start.

OK, thank you. Good evening. My name is Michael Nussus and I am a resident of Buckeye. I am standing here tonight because our community faces a severe housing shortage. Yet hundreds of approved below market homes are currently frozen. They're not frozen because of supply chains or market crashes. They're frozen because Councilman Tony Yonker is demanding $5 million for a sliver of land. Land that is appraised at a fraction of that cost. If this were just a standard private real estate dispute, I wouldn't be at this microphone, but this is not private. Councilman Yonker has hired fellow councilman, Patrick Hagestad, a practicing attorney to represent him. He is paying a colleague to extract this $5 million payout from the developer. Let's call this what it is, an egregious coordinated conflict of interest. Councilman Hagstad votes on city staff direction municipal budgets and zoning policies How can our city staff or city attorney remain neutral fair and objective? When negotiating a land deal with a sitting councilman who holds power over their very employment The city issued a public statement claiming this is a private party discussion that argument falls flat on its face I The developer requires this exact property because of a development agreement mandated by the city of Buckeye and all of you. Furthermore, reports indicate the city holds the right to claim that infrastructure right away for free. But city staff are refusing to enforce it. Are we pulling our punches to help an insider line his pockets? The developer is now considering a one and a half million dollar lawsuit against our city for failing to act. If that happens, it is Buckeye taxpayers who will foot the bill for this council's ethical blind spots. By allowing an attorney councilman to defend a neighbor councilman over a city mandated development dispute, you have utterly shattered public trust. You're hiding behind a technical legal loophole. Meanwhile, our city loses housing, faces litigation, and looks corrupt to the entire state of Arizona. I'm asking city management to immediately execute its rights under the development agreement, and I am publicly calling on Councilman Hagerstad to recuse himself as legal counsel from this private deal. We elected you to serve Buckeye, not each other's bank accounts. And lastly, unfortunately, the mayor is not here, which is really a disappointment considering you guys have had time off. You guys need to terminate the flock agreement. Obviously, we know all the controversy going on in the valley. I can't even get the mayor to respond to an email that I sent to him personally. And we need to follow everybody else in the valley. Give me stats on how much crime we've solved with those cameras, and maybe we'll change our minds in this town.

Thank you. Thank you for your time. Do we have any other public comment? No more comment cards?

No additional speaker request forms.

Very good. Thank you. Item number three, awards, presentations, proclamations. We have none for this evening. Item number four, consent agenda items. Approval of items on the consent agenda. All items with an asterisk are considered to be routine matters and will be enacted by one motion and vote of city council. For the record, staff has requested that consent agenda item 4AC be removed from the agenda with no action taken. Having said that, council, what is your pleasure on consent agenda items 4A through 4AB?

Mr. Vice Mayor, I'd like to make a motion that we approve consent agenda items 4A as in Adam through 4 Adam Boston on the consent agenda items.

Second. So we have a motion and a second for 4Able through 4Able Baker. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? motion carries uh... uh... 20-26, amending the zoning map of the city of Bogota to approximately 1.52 acres, generally located at the northwest corner of South Watson Road and West Rosa Road, from general commerce to neighborhood commercial.

Good evening, Vice Mayor. My name is Andrea Marquez. I will be presenting in the absence of Trish Pulliam, Senior Planner with Development Services. And the setup is new, so I don't know how to turn on the presentation.

Is that the wrong amount, Andrea?

Yeah. Okay. There you go. It's open. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening again. Andrea Marquez with Development Services, Senior Planner. Tonight we have before you the case PLZZ24003, the Buckeye Mini Market Rezone Request. The applicant, Ken Keller, and also the owner, Kamlesh Patel, is requesting a rezone of approximately $152,000. 1.52 acres located at the northwest corner of Watson Road and Rosier Road. The applicant is requesting to rezone this property from an obsolete zoning district known as General Commerce to a neighborhood commercial C1. And this request is in order to facilitate development of a neighborhood scale retail development.

Okay.

This site is located in a largely residential area, as you can see with the vicinity map above. The site abuts to a city Buckeye well to the north and Sonoran Vista residential subdivision to the west. And then there's a commercial site directly just south of that, south of Rosier Road, which is currently occupied by a barbershop. And Rialto West is also south of that. And then the Tanna Ranch subdivision is across over to the east of Watson. And that is plotted, not yet developed. The site is surrounded, as mentioned, by residential, and on our current general planned land use, as you can see, it's designated as neighborhood, which this is intended to accommodate residential neighborhoods along with neighborhood-skilled commercial uses. Again, that are just complementary to the surrounding residential development. So we're looking at neighborhood-scale shops, parks, recreational facilities, religious institutions, small offices, even educational institutions. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THE CURRENT ZONING GC IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE DESTINATION WHILE NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT C1 IS COMPATIBLE WITH NEIGHBORHOOD USE. AGAIN, AS YOU CAN SEE WITH THE ZONING MAP THERE, IT'S THE MAJORITY SURROUNDING OF RESIDENTIAL USES. THE ZONING DISTRICTS ARE BOTH PLANNED RESIDENTIAL, WHICH ARE REPRESENTED IN THE TAN SHADING COLOR. THERE'S A SMALL SITE TO THE SOUTH WITH A PINKISH WHICH IS KNOWN AS COMMERCIAL CENTER DISTRICT. AND THE WELL SITE TO THE NORTH IS ALSO GC, WHICH WILL ALSO REMAIN GC. The existing GC Commerce District, indicated by that red in the subject property there, is an obsolete district that the city is phasing out. The zoning district is intended for general commercial. So you're looking at employment uses and industrial uses, which of course are not compatible with this area and the surrounding uses. C1 is the lowest intensity under our commercial or C commercial district and it is intended again for the smaller compact community scale character for the surrounding area here. As per state statute and our development code, rezones do require public participation. That includes a neighborhood meeting, legal notices, site postings, and also, again, this public hearing, the reason why we're here today. As you can see, we had a neighborhood meeting September 3rd of last year, so almost a year ago, and I was kindly reminded I was in attendance to that meeting. How time flies. We have not received any comments or any public comments from any residents as to date. So for a rezone requirement, you know, we are not reviewing a site plan. This particular applicant did submit a conceptual site plan, which was included in our staff report. So the applicant has also gone through a pre-application conference. that has been held for that site plan for a proposed small retail center, which is anticipated to include a market and several other spaces for retail. So again, the city has not received a site plan application as to date, so that is still pending. Keep in mind, developer is required to provide all the infrastructure improvements for this development, and that will be determined at site plan. Again, staff is going to recommend approval of this rezone. The purpose for tonight is to conduct the required public hearing. Staff recommends that council adopts ordinance, the ordinance approving PLZ 240003. subject to the conditions that were included in the staff report listed A through G. The proposed rezone, of course, it furthers the goals of the Buckeye General Plan and contributes to the vibrant pedestrian community and the use is appropriate to the surrounding residential neighborhoods. The rezone does conform to our Buckeye Development Code and there were no outstanding issues from reviewing departments.

Good, thank you. I'm going to open a public hearing.

Just to satisfy my own curiosity, why didn't they apply for that tiny little piece just north of them? Is that not their property or why didn't they change that little fraction of a piece just north of them?

Vice mayor and council, thank you for asking that question. So the portion that is just north of them, it is currently owned by the city of Buckeye and there is currently a well site on that piece of property. So there is no need to do any redistricting for that piece of property at this time.

Very good, thank you very much. Any other questions from council?

Yes, Andrea, let's talk a little bit about the overlying reason for this change. Is it, because General Commerce would be able to do the project they're looking for right now. What are the positives for the community and for the developer moving forward with the necessity for this change? Is there anything in there with that different kind of the C1 designation that makes the project better overall?

Absolutely. So with the GC district and the C1 district, there are some overlapping uses that are allowed. So when a property comes in, that's what is the proposed use. So to give you some examples, some of that overlap with both the districts, because we're going to look at that first. We always see what's allowed in the district, and then we make the recommendation for the rezone. The overlap and comparable uses under GC and C1 are office building and business or professional office, clinic health care or medical office, any general retail, so that is allowed, and also even like a vet clinic. So those are the comparable. GC and C1, they have different development standards. So the GC, their setbacks are quite larger. So you're going to look at 50-foot setbacks, you know, the front, side, 15 in the rear.

So that would change the project drastically if you're doing a 50-foot setback all the way around, right? Absolutely. You're basically making that acre and a half, an acre and a quarter.

The standards don't allow a particular, you know, your building is going to have to fit within that building envelope. So, again, GC, again, just more intense uses such as a truck stop, warehousing, you know, outdoor storage. As towards C1, you're going to have, again, business, professional, any retail, general retail, and also a restaurant, but without a drive-thru. So our C1 is very specific in the types of uses and the intents of uses that are allowed. Did that answer your question?

No, it does. I think it's important to note those things and the reasons that we go from that old designation to the new one. Because a lot of staff time and effort went into updating all of our codes. So when we have an opportunity like this to update and make it more user friendly, not just for the developer, but it'll make it a nicer project overall. I just think it's important to point those out. So thank you very much, Andrea.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD TO THAT. YOU MENTIONED WE UPDATED OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO WITH THAT UPDATE, YOU KNOW, THE CITY DESIGN STANDARDS ARE MORE ROBUST. AND THEY'RE ALSO, THEY WERE MADE TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DIFFERENT USES.

absolutely yeah i think it's just important that we we had a process uh we didn't exercise and change our our code so that we moving forward we have nicer projects that have more specific uses i think it's important to you know it's just it's an acre and a half win let's let's let's celebrate that acre and a half win

We also, you know, improved and also have a higher level of design standards as well. And also just mitigation elements in there. So landscaping buffers regarding for the C1, they actually have a landscaping buffer against the residential, which is 30 feet. So that's something that we didn't have in our previous code. So a lot of nice upgraded development standards in our code.

Any other questions from council? I have none. So could we have a motion on item 5A?

Mr. Vice Mayor, I'd like to make a motion to approve agenda item 5A as an atom.

Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, Andrea.

Thank you.

Agenda item 5B, council to take action, excuse me, council to take action to approve an increase of 7.92 million in expenditure authority for capital improvement program project number 101150, intersection improvements for Ottawa brought away Yuma Road to Van Buren Street, modifying the total project expenditure from $16 million to an amount not to exceed $23.92 million to authorize the use of general obligation bond proceeds using the budget authority included in fiscal year 2027 budget to cover additional costs Authorize the city manager on behalf of the city to execute the associated contract amendments change orders acquisition of necessary property interests and other reasonable and necessary project expenditures in an amount not to exceed twenty three point nine two million dollars We do have a number of speaker requests on this item, on agenda item 5B. Speakers, I'm going to call you up. Because of the number, I'm going to limit you to one minute each. So with that, can we have Debbie Grohlke. I'm sorry if I butchered your last name. So just please state your name for the record.

Vice Mayor and the members of council. I'm speaking specifically regarding agenda item 5B. The city's agenda states that increased utility infrastructure requested by the adjacent developers and is subject to reimbursement. The language means reimbursement arrangement is directly relevant to the expenditure council is considering tonight before additional expenditures authority is approved the public record should establish whether executed reimbursement arrangements are already in place who is legally responsible for the reimbursement and the amount of percentage subject to the reimbursement and when is repayment repayment required The city should also disclose whether city funds or general obligation bond proceeds will initially finance infrastructure requested by the adjacent developers. If the public funds are being advanced for the infrastructure, the public should be informed of the protection securing repayment if the development is delayed, modified, transferred to another owner or does not proceed.

Thank you. If you want to leave your statement to the clerk, we can put that in the record. Thank you.

It obviously goes on further than that.

Thank you. Thomas Dwyer. Again, please state your name for the record.

My name is Thomas Dwyer. I'm a PC and state committeeman for Legislative District 25 and the Verado District. This is in reference to 5 Bravo. The council is being asked to increase the expenditure authorization. from 16 million to 23.92 million. That represents an additional 7.92 million. The city's agenda attributes this increase to several items, including two additional human road travel lanes, Previously unanticipated property interest increased utility infrastructure request requested by adjacent developers pavement work planned updates landscaping and construction costs what we would like to see is some some breakdown of where those $7.92 million is gonna be spent out to. We would like to see some type of transparency. And if you could have your team write up those, where that money is gonna be going specifically to allow the public to have better transparency.

All right, thank you for your comments. Thank you. Laura Weaver.

Laura Weaver. Vice Mayor and members of the Council, regarding agenda item 5B, the City's agenda states that this project includes increased utility infrastructure requested by adjacent developers and subject to reimbursement. That statement establishes that adjacent developers made requests that affect this publicly funded project. Before Council increases expenditure authority from $16 million to $23.92 million, The public should be provided the identities of these developers, a description of the additional utility infrastructure they requested, the dates those requests were made, and the estimated cost associated with those requests. It should also be made clear whether those requests occurred before or after the original $60 million project authorization. This information is directly relevant to understanding why the scope and cost of the project changed. The cities that established that these requests occurred, the public should therefore have a clear record identifying who made the request, what was requested, when it was requested, and what those requests will cost. So I respectfully request that the staff address the information raised in this comment so council and the public have that information before a vote is taken. I'm so sorry for speaking for you.

That was impressive.

Thank you. I'm an old educator. Thank you.

I took that speed reading class when I was in college. Nicely done.

I read that fast, too.

Gloria Wickenstad.

Good evening, Vice Mayor and Councilman. My name is Gloria Wickingstead. I'm speaking specifically regarding agenda item 5B. The city's agenda states that property interests that were not anticipated within the original project authorization are now necessary due to the timing of adjacent development. That statement makes the identity and location of the adjacent development relevant to the expenditure council is considering tonight. The public should be provided the name and location of that development, the identity of the developer, when the city became aware that the timing of the development would affect this project, and an explanation of what changed in the project as a result. Before council takes action on item 5B, I respectfully request that staff address the information raised in this comment so council and the public have that information before a vote is taken. Thank you.

Thank you. If you'll leave your comments with the clerk, please. And thank you, appreciate you guys coming forward and speaking on this agenda item. So now, agenda item 5B, we have Mr. Riley Quinlan with a presentation. And I think you're going to answer most of those questions.

Yes, sir. Absolutely. Good evening, Vice Mayor, Council. Riley Quinlan here to talk to you about the intersection at Verrado and Yuma. And for those that test. Is it working, Kevin? It's hard to hear. Red light was flashing on and off. Can you hear me? Better now? Okay. Very good.

Can the audience hear Riley okay? All right.

I was never an instructor or a teacher, but I'll do my best. Certainly can't read that fast. I'm very impressed.

Council Member Hagestad, can you hear the presentation okay?

Yes, I can.

We can barely hear you, but I heard the affirmative. Okay. Okay.

Very good. Vice Mayor, Council, Riley Quinlan, part of the Capital Improvement Program, the Program Management Office. Pleasure to be here tonight, here to talk to you about Rado and Yuma. And for those that have been affected by the reroute on your daily routine, you know exactly which intersection I'm talking about. And to the residents, really appreciate you coming out here today. I look forward to addressing those concerns, and then certainly if there's any further follow-up after this, I'd love to speak to you. to speak to you as well um and so vice mayor council the the goal here to talk to you is is to talk to you about the expenditure adjustments which is primarily spurred on by a couple factors one of which is the natural plan progression from uh kind of a 60 percent to fledgling conceptual uh cost model that was brought to council uh some time ago to advance the a very fast construction schedule that would capture the school closure and open largely in time for a lot of the development up by I-10 and brought away. And then similarly, the natural progression of developments that ebbs and flows and the impact that that has on the adjacent, in this case, city CIP project. So this evening, I wanted to talk to you about really what this project is. And so the project limits are the ultimate intersection at Verrado and Yuma. It's two lanes. all the way north from that intersection to Van Buren and then two lanes on the south half from Verrado Way to just shy of Dean and we can talk a little bit more about that. The addition there really is to eliminate a pinch point so that the half street improvements on the south half of Yuma Road is effectively ultimately complete from just east of the intersection that roughly the church access to west of Watson Road. And this was an addition after the fact that I think is going to eliminate that pinch point. And similarly, these are permanent improvements that are subject to reimbursement by the developer at time of development. The other component here, we are installing traffic signals at that intersection. And then the reason, largely speaking, for the origin of this project dates back many years, but is the drainage associated with the raising of that intersection. And then you'll find here the two lanes on the outer side of the existing Broadway from Van Buren to Yuma. And really, Oh, there we go. Got to get my flood photo there. OK. So the story here is really a success story in a lot of ways. The original project timeline was closer to north of 18 months to capture some of the phasing associated Based off of safety and cost, we were able to truncate that, save about 10, 11 months on the timeframe, overall impact to the residents there. Similarly, we were able to allocate about two to three crews, depending on the scope of work, to truncate that as significant. amount and then similarly based off of the the truncated construction timeline save north of a million dollars on some of the the other associated construction costs um as noted previously to capture the school closure at the end of may we came to council with a sixty percent cost model that uh... was backed by the plans at the time within the existing budget. In order to keep that moving forward, we were able to get the contractor out and continue progress on site. As part of the natural progression of going from 60 to 90 and 100% plans, some of the costs change associated with that. Now, you'll also find the schedule here is we will still open one lane in either direction by the end of October is the goal. The end of the calendar year is the ultimate intersection. And then we're anticipating the early part of 2027 for the eastbound southern half street of Yuma, roughly from that intersection to roughly the Dean area. And we'll talk a little bit more about that. Similarly, as the design progressed and after the council authorization earlier this year, some development that maybe was moving forward at a certain speed pulled back. And what that means is, This project took on improvements that would naturally have to be done by the developer, and a large portion of that is being reimbursed at the time of development. And a portion of that actually has already been collected from the developer. The land acquisition is another component of this budget adjustment request here. The city pursued an independent appraisal for about $330,000 of state land on the northern portion. Rather, that was the appraised value. State land had the value with a different appraiser at about a million dollars. This is not the first time we've got a landowner that values things differently from a buyer and seller perspective. And really what we are asking the council, the authority to do is to continue to pursue an administrative adjustment as we continue to advocate for the right dollar amount. When we came to you, council, earlier this year, we came with a level of contingency associated with that. We're asking for a little bit more contingency as we work towards the original appraised value. And then similarly, as the cost progresses, it's natural to see adjustments. The project management kind of global standard sees some of the cost estimate that we have at less than this value all the way up to 50% more than the budget. And this is kind of within that global standard you'll see here. Circling back, I forgot to highlight my image here. The rationale for this project originally was to raise the intersection due to extreme flooding in that area. And by raising that intersection, that made it not viable, largely speaking, from a safety perspective to keep traffic in as you raise that. And you'll see some of the progress on site. Again, largely speaking, some of the major updates that you'll see as part of the budget adjustment request, the southern half street of Yuma from Verado to roughly Dean was included after the council request. And this is to alleviate that pinch point. There was a large portion of drainage updates that happened from our 60% to 100%. What that meant was the drainage was improved on the eastern half of the site, and it was progressed. And then similarly, The roadway was actually raised about another foot and a half and that had some cascading effects with some of the cost. As we refined that, that's here referenced in the GMP updates from council. And then similarly, we had development on the southwest corner and southeast corner. We'll get to on the next slide. A large portion of that is reimbursable at the time of development. And in fact, the southeast corner has already paid their share at this time. And you'll see some of the outlines of some of the larger drainage components here. We're seeing huge regional flows from roughly the northwest corner south and then similarly the southeast corner south under Yuma and the drainage channel associated with that. The summary here from the 60% to 100%, you'll see that $3.15 million number. You'll see a good portion of that is reimbursable at the time of development from the developer on the southwest corner. We are in active conversations to refine that number with the contractor as we speak. but that does include the drainage, the rip-rap, some addition of pavements on the east side, and the elevation associated with those drainage improvements. Similarly, the eastbound Yuma lanes, that's to capture the pinch points from Verrado Way past Watson Road. That's gonna be a fully built out southern half street, and because that is permanent infrastructure, that'll be reimbursable at the time of development from the southwest corner. Mention the Arizona state land appraisal. Uh, we had an appraisal at $330,000 roughly. We asked council previously for an expenditure of roughly $500,000. We're asking council for the rest of that flexibility up to 500 or up to a million dollars, which is the value of Arizona state lands appraisal for their land. We have the full rights to be on their property. So we will continue the administrative appeal on behalf of the city to get to that number. The southwest corner lands, there were some modifications with the speed with which the developer was moving and the city anticipates a large portion of that to be reimbursable at the time of development and they have been in to our development services team for advancing their plan. And the southeast corner was, again, another recent change after we asked for your authorization of the $16 million budget, which includes utilities, landscape, some basin work. And we have collected the money from that, and a good portion is reimbursable there. So you'll see totaling an estimated value of north of 50% of the council requested expenditure adjustment here is covered from reimbursables. And a lot of those values we will continue to refine as we finalize this project here close to the end of this year. So what we're asking council here tonight, the is to increase the currently, uh, valued budget of 16 million by 7.9, two up to that roughly $24 million number and the authority to continue to, um, advocate on an administrative level with Arizona state lands to, uh, settle on the correct land price with that. I'll take questions.

All right, questions from Council Council member uses.

Yes, I went over quite a bit of this with staff today and we talked a lot about it. A lot of what I had missed on it or overlooked was the reimbursement part of this. That's a very large, substantial amount of this is reimbursable. I think some people do not quite understand what's meant by reimbursable and how long it might take to get some of that back because the person has to start developing if he wants to pay and has to pay the money back to the city. But we are going to get our money back eventually. It may take a year or two. But we'll get our money back. But the project is such an important project that to stop it at this time would be totally ridiculous. We've got to complete the project. I go through that intersection every day. And we've got to complete that project and get it open again. School opening right now is quite a mess, and I'm sure they're not happy. But it's a necessary project. And as someone pointed out to me today, the majority of this additional is going to have to be reimbursed. So we are going to get a lot of our money back. As far as the individuals that own it, a lot of it on the north side now belongs to the state. Before it belonged to the Air Force, but now it belongs to the state. And the state's going to be strangling us on it. and try and get as much money as they can. I'm not happy about it, and I don't think most of us up here are. But the state holds us by the neck, and they're saying a million bucks, and we're saying 300,000 is a reasonable price. So we'll fight it out with them, and we're pretty good at fighting these things out. So we'll come up with some kind of a compromise. But it isn't a matter of whether it needs to be done. It needs to be done. So that's all I've got to say, Mr. Vice Mayor.

Thanks. kind of amplify Councilman Eustace's comment. Can you explain when we're talking about reimbursable, who is paying who? I think that may answer some of their questions.

So can you walk us through that? This is something that we work hand in glove with our city engineer on for the natural progression of development coming in and out when a developer comes in, they are required to build their half street improvements and potentially some other components. When the city advances infrastructure in this case, the city would build those improvements that the developer would naturally be required to do. the developer would reimburse the city back for those costs that they would naturally have to do some of the benefits of that are advancing the infrastructure and then similarly when a developer comes in they would have to do very messy utility connections within the right-of-way within the street cut it up have a lot of traffic control challenges that are associated with it it's much cleaner and frankly more efficient in a lot of ways for a developer to capture the economies of scale of a larger construction project for this type of infrastructure where they would be reimbursing the city for what they would normally have to do as part of their development.

So when a couple years ago when we were putting the bond forward, the two questions on the bond, the one question around transportation projects, the thing we wanted to avoid, was the scallop street problem, where a developer comes in, develops on their particular parcel, they do their required and pay for their required half street improvement, but the parcel that's next to them hasn't been developed, so it scallops back down and then goes back out again. So one of the things that the city wanted to do with the bond is if we go in and do street improvements like we're doing on verado way in yuma that we complete the whole street and as those sections develop the developers are still obligated to pay for that infrastructure that the city advanced so we're adding money to this project in order to complete that and the developers who we may not know who they are at this point they come in and develop their particular parcel they're going to reimburse the city for the cost of the infrastructure am i correct with that vice mayor that's correct absolutely thank you did that help okay thanks i'm seeing nodding heads over there so hopefully it's okay any other questions from council yes

Is that a whole percent payback, or is it a smaller payout? Does that make sense? If we develop an other side of the street, whenever they start to develop their property, they pay us

Council Member Beard, yes sir. So the intent there is the developer would reimburse the city for the permanent improvements associated with their half street. Yes sir, yes sir. And so as annotated in this chart here, we have a percentage that is associated with the permanent infrastructure that the various corners are anticipated to either already have contributed or anticipated to contribute for the permanent infrastructure largely associated with their half street.

Can you go back to that slide that shows that table?

Oh.

The cost table, right there.

I thought I went to that. Thank you, sir.

Yeah. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Let's talk about that, the reimbursement slope. Correct me if I'm wrong, on the scallops breed improvement, the way that works is it's a 10 years time lane, correct?

That's correct, for a Scallop Street cost recovery.

Correct, Scallop Street. And doesn't that percentage paid back reduce by every year that it's not developed?

In this case, there's a number of, I appreciate the question, Councilman Youngker. In this case, there's a number of ways to go after reimbursement from city funds for natural development improvements. Cost recovery or scalloped streets is one. Development agreements is another.

So you're doing it, you're accomplishing, you're perpetuating the scalloped street improvement through the development agreement? Yes, sir. Is that what you're telling me? Yes, sir. Okay. So that's that's on that one. What about one of the questions that was asked I think by multiple of the speakers earlier is who is the developer? I think that you're talking about the southwest corner. I don't remember the name of the developer themselves but I remember we did do a lot of changes to make their project come forward and work out very well for them for the different types of zoning usages they have within that parcel. And at the time that we did that, they were pretty energized about moving forward with the project. Where are they at now, and can you please put out there for the record who we're talking about?

Council Member Yerger, happy to. This developer in this case in the southwest corner is Si High, and they own a number of different parcels within the city. Recently purchased, the same conglomerate purchased lands on either side of the 10, south of McDowell, between the 10 and then south of the 10, roughly the southwest corner of Jackrabbiton and the 10. And they also are in a parcel on Miller, as I understand it. This developer is continuing to progress plans in the city and has active conversations with city staff. And for that reason, there's active conversations about that development agreement. And we anticipate that to firm up in the near future with them.

So what's the timeline on that DA? Do we know if it's going to be done in a year? Are we on it?

And Vice Mayor, Council Member, if I may, we're hoping to wrap that up sooner than a year because of the need for timing. But I also wanted to clarify for the record, we're getting a lot of questions about the mechanism. And we're using some terms, and I'd like to just make it very clear. There are a number of tools in the city's toolbox to try to work with property owners and developers in the area to coordinate the timing of the city's project. So we are, I am hearing, especially in some of the comments from the public, some maybe intermingling of terms. So we have utilized fee in lieu and that was what Mr. Quinlan walked us through earlier where we have an agreement with a property owner or a developer who may be moving forward at a time that is after the city's timeline and the city's needs. And many of those, some, not many, but some of those have already paid some or all of the amounts under their agreements. Then there are different types, again, with the scalloped streets. Those are properties that may not be moving forward at any time. We are doing what we can to try to make sure we preserve the city's right to recover funds as appropriate and lawful. And then with the development agreement that is more of a really just, I guess a fee in lieu with additional components that would change that from just a standard fee in lieu. And due to the current status, I would anticipate maybe three to five months out as a hopeful. I don't like to be locked into, I'm getting a look at it, better not be that long. So we're doing our best to try to wrap that up just as quickly as we can so that the project can proceed in a timely manner.

Thank you. And so that also answers my next question about the Scallop Street improvement. Because if we're doing that mechanism through the DA, then it's not. The Scallop Street is only 1,000 feet from the center line of the intersection is what that ordinance is allowed by law. So that's why my next question was, how are we accomplishing using the Scallop Street beyond that 1,000 feet? So doing it within a development agreement makes perfect sense. Thank you. Where are we at on the timeline for this? I know that you were talking about helping to the overall project. Are we 30% done, 60% done? Are we on time? Are we ahead of schedule? What are we looking at on that? Because it's a big pain in the neck for a lot of people that go through there. So we stand here and talk about, we want to do this accelerated, accelerated. Are we still accelerated? Are we still moving along that timeline?

Council Member Younger, I appreciate the question. Absolutely, yes, sir. So what you'll see relatively articulated in this picture here is a number of different pieces of equipment in a small area. What we have on site is the most pieces of equipment that you can do safely. And so we are still anticipating this to be open to two lanes of traffic, one in either direction, north, south, east, and west, by the end of October, with the ultimate intersection by the end of this calendar year. With the addition of the Yuma lanes, we anticipate that to potentially trickle into the beginning of next calendar year. However, that will not impact the ultimate intersection and the traffic flow associated with that is our intent there.

Okay. Let's talk about the appraisal differentiation real quick. How do part of this, am I understanding it correctly, that part of this increase is to help overcome the difference between the appraisals? Am I looking at that correctly? Yes, sir. Okay. When we have opposing opinions on that, when we have these happen to a private citizen, how do we, we normally will look at doing a condemnation if we can't really come to an agreement. Is that a mechanism that we have within the state, or is it because it's municipality to municipality? Is there some sort of stoppage there?

Councilman, I appreciate the question. I want to stay away from the legal components here. But as I understand it, the mechanism that we are articulating here is we are pursuing a competing appraisal, essentially a third party appraisal. So the city has our appraisal. State land has their appraiser. And then we are bringing in a third appraiser to have that conversation about the administrative adjustment. And so we anticipate that we are in active conversations with the state right now.

the goal here with this council uh item is to come once and for all uh but at the same time we are anticipating the goal of moving that number down so what i hear you saying with that third appraisal is that you're basically asking for an action within this seven hundred seven million dollars six hundred thousand that is to make up the difference between the two appraisals But if we get a third appraisal in, there might not be the usage of that money. So therefore you're just looking for the authorization within this action to do that in case of the worst case scenario. That's correct. Yes. Okay. I think that's an important, that's an important thing that we have to be prepared to act when it's time to do it. Council actions take time and those appraisals also take time. Um, sorry, I took notes. Just one last thing that I had and it was more about the being open about the developer and who it actually is. I think that brings up an interesting point that we can maybe look at for these type of actions and things like that when we talk about, I think developer is pretty ambiguous when you talk about that. There's so many developers that are actively working in the city but I think that we would like to see maybe using the name we're talking to these people it's a matter of public record we need to kind of say in and not just developer the developer and then call them out at this case would be sigh hi to make sure that we are we have that that clarity with the public so it doesn't look like we're just talking about a developer in a general form so that they can do the research on their own and maybe maybe curve a lot of those questions absolutely yes all right thank you so much thank you mr mayor i mean by mr vice mayor i'm going to sign a bunch of stuff so any other questions from council

And was that helpful to you folks? OK, very good. Thank you.

And can you follow up with everybody, just whether it be email or whatever, just to make sure that we're good on all those things? You guys OK with that? Yes, sir, absolutely.

I believe we have contact information as part of the council. Maybe we don't. I'm getting, I would be happy to talk to you after this.

One person. Perfect. Thank you guys for coming out. So, council, what's your pleasure on item 5B?

Mr. Vice Mayor, I would like to make a motion that we approve agenda item 5B as in boy.

Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. so we have comments from mayor and council any comments from the council hasn't even been 24 hours yet it was mean let me wait let me get this there we go any other comments serious comments

I'll make one comment. I just want to thank Dave Rogwick for all he's done for the city. This is his last council meeting that he'll be with us. He'll be retiring. So thank you for all you've done. Thank you for your wisdom and your guidance for the council through this year and a half that I've known you. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Let me echo that. So congratulations on a well-deserved retirement.

Thank you.

Your last council meeting. Ever. We're going to stretch this out to about 9.45.

I think he's going to enjoy that retirement.

Absolutely. Well deserved. I just want to thank the speakers on item 5B. This is the way the system is supposed to work. You know, come up, share your questions, share your concerns, allow us a chance to address those, and if we don't, hold us accountable to it. So again, thank you for coming up and speaking tonight. Very much appreciated. City Manager's Report and Summary of Current Events.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. Our fire department is partnering with several groups over September 11th to memorialize the 25th anniversary of the 9-11 attacks. The day will start with the stair climb at the Verrado Stairs at 5 AM, with a bell ringing ceremony at 5.45 AM, and speakers beginning at 6 AM. Following that over at the Festival Veterans Club, they will be hosting a ceremony at 9 AM at the fire station 704, which will feature the color guard. A flag ceremony and special guest speakers. And for everybody who did the stairs, you will be deserving of a pancake breakfast from 8 to 10 AM at the center on Main. The cost of the breakfast is $10 with all proceeds going to the United Buckeye Firefighters Charities. All of those are in recognition again of the 25th anniversary of the 9-11 attacks. And as Councilmember Berry brought up, tonight is Dave's last day with this, or last council meeting with the city. He is retiring this week, and I just want to take a moment to recognize him for everything that he has done. Dave joined the city in 2017 as our Economic Development Director. and later took on his current role as deputy city manager. Dave's impact on the city of Buckeye during a period of extraordinary growth has been significant. Under his leadership, the city has attracted thousands of new jobs, billions of dollars in investments, while laying much of the groundwork for the employment, commercial, and development opportunities that we continue to see today. For those of us that live and work here, we see what's coming out of the ground at the Verrado Marketplace and think it happened overnight. That did not happen overnight. It's because of the work of Dave and the rest of the economic development team and a lot of what goes on in the city that happens for years before you see any bit of dirt turning. Dave's impact, of course, extends well beyond Buckeye. His career in economic development spans more years than Council Member Berry has been alive. So he has served in leadership roles throughout the region, and he is a respected regional leader, mentor, and partner whose work has helped shape economic development across the valley. Dave, on behalf of the city of Buckeye as an organization, we thank you for your leadership, your service, and the lasting impact that you've made to the community. And I invite everybody, all of council to attend tomorrow as we help to send Dave off for a retirement party tomorrow afternoon. Thank you, Dave. And if you would like to make any comments, the mic is yours until I believe 945. You really want me to go that long?

We're ready. I'm not. I was just trying to calculate in my career. I think I've done about 1,800, 1,900 city council meetings amongst Scottsdale, Phoenix, and here. I missed them just slightly. But I do want to thank all of you. I can honestly say this is definitely one of the best councils I've ever had the pleasure of working with. You guys are fantastic, very collegial. You work together well. You may not always agree on on problems and issues and solutions but you do a great job and and the city is much better off for it so i i thank you so much for that and i've really enjoyed the opportunity to to work here in buckeye thank you thank you and just uh

add to Doug's comments. I don't think I heard it. I apologize if I missed it, but Dave did a stent as an interim city manager for about six months. So again, thank you for all your leadership. I very much appreciate it. This is that awkward part, when does everybody sit down? So there are proposals for future agenda items. Do we have any? And with that, our evening's adjourned. Thank you all for attending. Have a great evening.