There are a number of items on tomorrow's agenda that are deserving of more attention to details or even questioning more: for example Item 4-3 that's a mish-mash of too much.
Blogger Note: The entire Meeting Agenda is way down below and after these details are inserted here . . . just to illustrate how much time it takes
5-Year Term Contract for Electrical, Lighting, Data Communications, and Security Products and Related Products, Services and Solutions for Citywide Departments (Citywide)
This Citywide contract is a key source for tools, test equipment, safety, maintenance, repair and operations products in support of electrical, lighting, data/communications, networking and security.
Primary users include Parks, Recreation and Community Facilities, the Materials and Supply Warehouse, Transportation, Communications, Information Technology, and Fire and Medical.
Price: $400,000 Annually or a 5-Year Contract Total of over $2,000,000 - that 2 Million-Dollars
_______________________________________________________________________
Take a look at a series of contracts for the Signal Butte Water Treatment Plant: Items 4k-4m
Network switches on the City and Police Department data networks are used to connect devices and control access on both networks. This equipment requires a lifecycle upgrade due to its age, lack of parts and software support, and to remain current with changing technologies and data rate requirements. This upgrade will allow the City to take advantage of increased network speeds, improved reliability, improved security through advanced access controls and increased capacity for future growth.
The Information Technology Department and Purchasing recommend authorizing the purchase using the Maricopa County and State of Arizona cooperative contracts with the lowest-quoted vendors: Sentinel Technologies; and Trace3; plus contingency funding, at $1,740,000.
This purchase is funded by the Lifecycle Management Program Budget.
OK > Take a look at the 2-page 188 KB Council Report:
City Council Report
Date: March 19, 2018
To: City Council
Through: Michael Kennington, Chief Financial Officer
From: Edward Quedens, Business Services Director Matt Bauer, Procurement Administrator
Subject: Purchase of Replacement/Upgrade Network Hardware and Services for the Information Technology Department (Funded by the Lifecycle Management Program Budget) (Citywide)
Recommendation
Council is requested to approve the award as recommended.
The Information Technology Department and Purchasing recommend authorizing the purchase using the Maricopa County and State of Arizona cooperative contracts with the lowest quoted vendors: Sentinel Technologies; and Trace3; plus contingency funding, for $1,740,000.00.
Background / Discussion
The network switches on the City and Police Department data networks are used to connect devices and control access on both networks.
These include user workstations, telephones, “Internet of Things” (IoT) devices such as building physical security monitoring, access control systems, building environmental controls, security cameras, etc.
The current switches were purchased in 2009 and have been out of support since June 2016.
This equipment requires a lifecycle upgrade due to its age, lack of parts and software support, and to remain current with changing technologies and data rate requirements.
The lifecycle upgrade of this network hardware will allow the City to take advantage of increased network speeds, improved reliability, improved security through advanced access controls and increased capacity for future growth.
The State and Maricopa County cooperative contracts were competitively bid, meet procurement requirements and prices are competitive due to nationally based volume contract pricing. It is unlikely that competitive bidding would result in better pricing than through these cooperative contracts.
Purchase Information
Action: Award Procurement Type: Cooperative Contract Use Contract Number: 2018154 Contracting Agency/Contract Numbers: Maricopa County/16076-RFP and State of Arizona/ ADSPO16-137342
[Page 2]
Local Consideration: Policy did not apply to this procurement method
Protests Received: None
Funding Source: The purchase is funded in the Information Technology Department through the Lifecycle Management Program budget
AWARD RECOMMENDATION
Sentinel Technologies – Downers Grove, IL Network Hardware and Support per Contract Nos. 2018154, Maricopa County 16076-RFP, and Quote City of Mesa – Catalyst 9000 Access Layer Switches v 3.6 dated 1/26/2018
Network Hardware and Software $1,270,106.00 Solution Maintenance and Support $128,180.00 Professional Services $16,800.00 Shipping $250.00 Estimated Sales Tax $110,953.93 Total $1,526,289.93
Cisco Software per Contract Nos. 2018154, Maricopa County 16076-RFP, and Quote No. 39073 dated 1/30/2018
Software and Support $65,333.33 Estimated Sales Tax $5,259.33 Total $70,592.66
Network Optics per Contract Nos. 2018154, State of Arizona ADSPO16137342, and Quote No. 049064 v1.3 dated 2/12/2018
Trace3 – Phoenix, AZ Network Hardware and Software $49,979.82 Estimated 8.6% Sales Tax $4,300.00 Total $54,279.82
Combined Total Amount $1,740,000.00 (includes Contingency at $88,837.59)
________________________________________________________________________________________
HERE'S JUST ONE MORE ITEM WITH A LOT OF CONSEQUENCES
Attention: Take a look at Item 6-a
Appendix A is a list of 16 proposed specific revisions to the Zoning Ordinance.
These were approved at a December 20, 2017 Planning & Zoning Meeting
Amending Mesa Zoning Ordinance; title 11 of the Mesa City Code.
Amendments include various technical updates and minor revisions to Chapters 1 through 5 and other Chapters that relate to the changes made in Chapters 1 through 5. (Citywide)
The changes include:
- revising certain definitions
- minor revisions to the AG and residential zoning districts, including changes to land use and development standards for specific uses and activities
- revisions to the requirements for accessory dwelling units, and certain building setbacks and building forms
- modifying design elements and other requirements in the RSL zoning district.
The City Council Report alone is 403KB - 5 pages
Here it is:
City Council Report
DATE: March 5, 2018
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Karolyn Kent, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Christine Zielonka, Development Services Director
John Wesley, Planning Director
SUBJECT: Mesa Zoning Ordinance text amendments and technical updates -
Proposed amendments to Chapters 1 through 5 including changes to supporting chapters as they apply.
PURPOSE AND RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Division is undertaking a comprehensive review of the Mesa Zoning Ordinance (MZO) to make updates and changes to the code in response to the experience of active application of the ordinance over the past six years.
A series of text amendments and technical updates will be processed over the next year.
Attached is a document, Appendix A, that contains each of the currently proposed amendments.
This first set of modifications focuses on Chapters 1 through 5 and supporting chapters that relate to changes made in Chapters 1 through 5.
The intent of the Text amendments includes
> clarifications and technical updates to make ordinance more user friendly,
> clarifications and technical updates to reduce the need for Zoning Administrator Interpretations
> clarifications and technical updates to remove stringent requirements for individual property owners.
Most of the proposed changes occur in Chapter 5, Residential Districts, with subsequent changes in additional chapters as needed for support.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
In 2011 the MZO was completely revised creating new zoning districts and introducing new requirements. Although there have been “housekeeping” items and text amendments that have been approved since 2011, staff has determined it is time for a thorough review of the ordinance to address issues that have arisen since the code was adopted.
This is the first of several amendments that will review the entire ordinance to make needed updates.
Attached as Appendix A is a list of 16 proposed specific revisions to the Zoning Ordinance.
The items listed in Appendix A are listed by the order presented in this report, which is organized by chapter and then general topic. The affected zoning ordinance sections or chapters are listed in this report in parentheses after the topic.
Chapter 1-Introductory Provisions
1) Remove Section 11-1-6.G from the Ordinance. This section addressed the transition from the previous code to the current code and had a deadline of September 3, 2014. The section is no longer relevant. (11-1-6.G)
Chapter 4- Agriculture District
2) Changes to the Land Use Regulations.
This section includes the following changes to Table 114-2:
>Clarification of the day care group home to be consistent with the definition of the use
2 types; Remove the “Additional Use Regulations” for the small Day Care Group home;
> Clarification of the types of animal sales and services so that it is consistent with the use type definitions
> Clarification of the Home occupation as an accessory use and add the requirement of a Special Use Permit (SUP) for expansion of the home occupation.
This is not a change to requirements.
3) Revise the allowed building projections into required yards in the AG District. Add clarification that the projections are applied to single residences. Revision to the language not allowing projections into the Public Utility Easement. (Section 11-4-4.D)
4) Add Review of Plans in AG District. This is to add in the “Article 7, Administration.” This was omitted from the original ordinance and the sentence was not complete. This will complete the sentence and clarify requirements. (Section 11-4-6)
5) Add AG District to Animal Keeping and Clarify Zoning Administrator acting as hearing officer: This is to amend the standards in Chapter 31, to include the AG district. This will make the animal keeping standards consistent with the requirements currently identified in the land use regulations table for the AG District. (Section 11-31-4)
Chapter 5-Residential District
6) a. Part 1, Changes to the Land Use Regulations.
This section includes the following changes to Table 11-5-2:
Day Care Group Home,
Home Occupations,
Home Occupations as an accessory use,
Animal Sales and Services and
Accessory Dwelling Unit in residential Districts.
> Clarification of allowed number of children in small and large day care group homes to be consistent with definition in the Ordinance
> Remove “Additional Use Regulations” for small day care group homes;
> Clarify types of permitted Animal Sales and Services;
> Remove reference to Special Use Permit (SUP) for accessory dwelling units.
A special use permit can no longer be required for leasing so that the MZO is consistent with State law; and,
Remove Home occupation as a primary use and list under accessory uses add home occupations. (Table 11-5-2).
6) b. Part 2, Day Care Group Home in Residential Districts and amend standards to apply only to Large Day Care Group Homes.
Amend to standards in Chapter 31 for Day Care Group Homes to apply only to Large Day Care Group homes, 5 or more children.
These standards will not apply to Small Day Care Group Homes, four or less children. (11-31-13)
6) c. Part 3, Accessory Dwelling Unit in Residential Districts –
> Add setback and water service requirements and remove SUP requirements.
The zoning ordinance allows for accessory dwelling units in single-residence districts, but must do so in a way that does not allow duplexes. One way to do this is through the water utility by allowing only one meter. This change clarifies this requirement. This change also adds clarification that an attached accessory dwelling unit can encroach like the allowed encroachments for livable area in MZO section 11-5-7.A.
This allows livable area that is no more than one-half the width of the residence to project up to 10’ into the required rear yard but cannot be closer than 10’ to the rear property line. Under the current code, detached accessory structures other than dwelling units can encroach into side and rear yards. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between pool houses and detached accessory dwelling units. Further, other types of detached structures can have as much or more of an impact on neighboring properties. This change will allow for a detached accessory dwelling unit to encroach into required side and rear yards with limitation on placement and height of buildings the same as other detached buildings. An example is a maximum 15’ high building can encroach into the rear yard but must maintain the side yard requirement. (Section 11-31-3)
6) d. Part 4, Modify Accessory Dwelling Unit Definition.
The modification of the term is within the Land Use Classifications for allowed uses in the zoning district. This is consistent with the Zoning Administrator’s interpretation and is intended to reduce the number of interpretations. (Section 11-86)
6) e. Modify Dwelling Unit definition. This will update the current definition to remove reference to family. It clarifies the rooms that make up a definition and removes the singular kitchen requirement. (Section 11-87)
7) Building form standards for garages in the RS District and deleting the associated figure. The amendment clarifies building form requirements in the residential district.
The proposed change separates the previous “a” item into “a” and “b” and makes the following changes:
Limits the requirement to lots less than 100’ wide;
Clarifies what is meant by “primary wall facing the street” consistent with past interpretations and applications;
Removes the concern for trying to bring the older homes that do not meet this requirement into compliance consistent with the Zoning Administrator’s interpretation of the requirement; Removes the figure because it is not consistent with the requirements; and,
Renumbers the requirements as needed for clarification. (Section 11-5-3.E and Figure 11-5.3.E.1)
8) Remove Side yards for vehicular access in the RS District. This section requires a 10’ side yard for vehicular access for lots that do not have access to an alley. This was first introduced in the 1970’s when subdivisions began to be designed without alleys. Currently a 10’ side yard is a luxury; recent subdivisions do not have a spacious 10’ side yard setback. If a house does have the 10’ side yard it must remain clear for vehicular access and does not allow for anything in the 10’ including pool equipment or a/c units. This removes the 10’ 2yard for vehicular access requirements. Clarify newly established item 6 adding the word livable to be consistent with Figure 11-5-7.A. (Section 11-5.7.A).
12) a. Part 1, Specific Purpose of the RSL District.
Change lot size to lot area to be consistent with development standards for the RSL District. Remove the word “family” in regard to day care for consistency with the zoning ordinance. (Section 11-33-2)
12) b Part 2, Development Standards for Designators within the RSL District.
This proposed change will clarify that the number of design elements required are based on the designator chosen and not the average size of the lot for the project.
Table 11-5-4.A has been updated to show the changes needed for full clarification of design element requirements. (Section 11-54.A and Table 11-5-4.A)
12) c. Part 3, Development Standards for the RSL District,
remove reference to tandem parking standards, clarify maximum building coverage and amend typographical error for trash storage and screening standards.
Changes in the Table include removal of the additional standards reference to tandem parking.
This information is not needed information because all parking and circulation for all projects are required to meet requirements in chapter 32 of the Ordinance.
The maximum building coverage was added to the table to clarification purposes.
Finally, this modification includes correcting the reference in the Additional Standards section at the bottom of the Table for Trash Storage and Screening from “G” to “F.” (Table 11-5-4.B)
13) a. Part 1 Useable open space development standards in the RSL district.
Adding descriptive language for Useable Open Space within the Useable Open Space. It is described in the Streetscape elements portion of the RSL requirements. (Section 11-5-4.A.2.a)
13) b. Part 2, Usable Open Space Development Standards in the RSL District and amend typographical errors.
The numbering under 11-5-4.B should begin with number one rather than number three. This will make additional standards within the table consistent with the referred subjects.
Staff is removing reference to family as the term is no longer utilized within the MZO, it is a left-over form previous ordinances.
Add the term “Useable” to the open space requirements within the RSL district. (Section 11-5-4.B)
14) Clarify Development Standards in the RM District and amend typographical errors. Proposed changes include removal of the word “family” to be consistent with the current MZO. Removal of reference to tandem parking as additional standards as this is already addressed and is redundant information. Clarify setback for projects adjacent to freeways as 30’. (Table 11-5-5)
15) Remove the word “family” and replace with residence in residential districts.
The term family such as “Single-Family” or “Multi-Family” are not terms that are utilized in the current MZO. Removal of the word “family” and replacing with “residence” will make these sections consistent with the ordinance. (Section 11-5).
16) Revise definition for Factory Built building and remove definition from manufactured home definition.
Currently, the definition is placed under “Manufacture Home” heading. However, the definition includes that a Factory built building is not a manufactured home.
Staff is proposing to remove the definition from the manufactured home heading. The more significant change is to add that all factory built buildings need to be consistent with State requirements. This will help to define for staff as well as the public. (Section 11-87).
5
The Mayor and City Council may modify or remove from the list any one of the items proposed to be revised.
RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Board at the hearing of December 20, 2017 and Staff recommend approval of the text amendments and technical updates as outlined in Appendix A.
_______________________________________________________________________
| File #: | 18-0176 |
| Type: | Ordinance | Status: | Agenda Ready |
| In control: | City Council |
| On agenda: | 3/5/2018 |
| Title: | Amending Mesa Zoning Ordinance; title 11 of the Mesa City Code. Amendments include various technical updates and minor revisions to Chapters 1 through 5 and other Chapters that relate to the changes made in Chapters 1 through 5. (Citywide) The changes include minor revisions to word choice, spelling and grammar; revising certain definitions; minor revisions to the AG and residential zoning districts, including changes to land use and development standards for specific uses and activities; revisions to the requirements for accessory dwelling units, and certain building setbacks and building forms; and modifying design elements and other requirements in the RSL zoning district. |
| Attachments: | 1. Council Memo, 2. Appendix A, 3. Ordinance, 4. Minutes, 5. Resolution |
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
| Meeting Name: | City Council | Agenda status: | Final |
| Meeting date/time: | 3/19/2018 5:45 PM | Minutes status: | Draft |
| Meeting location: | Council Chambers - Upper Level | ||
| Published agenda: |  Agenda | Published minutes: | Not available |
| Meeting video: |
| Attachments: |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment