HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 1/29/2018 City of Glendale
5850 West Glendale Avenue
Glendale, AZ 85301
riGLEN,
Meeting Minutes
Monday, January 29, 2018
10:00 A.M.
Special Workshop Meeting
Civic Center Annex—
City
nnexCity Council
Mayor Jerry Weiers
Vice Mayor Lauren Tolmachoff
Councilmember Jamie Aldama
Councilmember Joyce Clark
Councilmember Ian Hugh
Councilmember Ray Malnar
Councilmember Bart Turner
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Weiers called the meeting to order at 10:01 a.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Jerry Weiers
Vice Mayor Lauren Tolmachoff
Councilmember Joyce Clark
Councilmember Ian Hugh
Councilmember Bart Turner
Absent: Councilmember Jamie Aldama (Arrived after roll was called)
Councilmember Ray Malnar(Arrived after roll was called)
Also Present: Kevin Phelps, City Manager
Tom Duensing, Assistant City Manager
Jack Friedline,Assistant City Manager
Michael Bailey, City Attorney
Julie K. Bower, City Clerk
WORKSHOP SESSION
1. COUNCIL POLICY GUIDANCE—SESSION 5
Presented By: Brian Friedman, Economic Development Director
Sam McAllen, Development Services Director
INFILL
Councilmember Aldama arrived.
Mr. Phelps said staff had provided information regarding infill and updated information on
annexation and would be seeking direction from Council in the near future so policy documents
could be crafted.
Mr. Friedman said the following items would be covered:
• Follow-up from previous workshop
•Current infill conditions
• Infill policies from benchmark cities
•Proposed strategy
Mr. Friedman explained that the term "greenfield development" applied to properties that had no
prior development on the site, such as the Ikea site. He said opportunities had been lost due to
the absence of an infill program. The opportunities that were lost to the city of Phoenix included
arts, microbrewery and sports.
Councilmember Turner asked if that included restaurants and bars.
Mr. Friedman said that was correct.
Mr. Friedman said a question that had been asked was could timelines or deadlines be mandated
.for all development incentives. He said the answer was yes.
Councilmember Malnar arrived.
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 2 of 10
Mr. Friedman said the City currently had the ability to impose timelines/deadlines using tools such
as development agreements, permitting timeframes or other programs.
Mr. Friedman said there was a national trend to shift from residential to shopping center use and
vice versa through adaptive reuse projects.
Councilmember Clark said the focus seemed to be on commercial, office and manufacturing. She
had asked for figures regarding residential infill and the cost per home.
Mr. Friedman said staff had been working with Applied Economics and a draft report was being
reviewed but he did not have an exact date for its release.
Mr. Phelps said the report looked at a small infill scenario of 20 homes versus a larger 1,000
homes scenario. It was important to understand the infrastructure and services that were
necessary. Staff had initial numbers but was stress-testing around the models and developing a
range of costs.
Councilmember Clark asked if the analysis would include costs defrayed by property tax and
sales tax.
Mr. Phelps said that was correct. The consultant projected that within the next 20 years, 300
shopping centers would close. The City would need to look at large areas, such as Arrowhead
Towne Center, for an adaptive reuse policy and continue to adapt to the economic climate.
Mr. Friedman reviewed current infill conditions. Agricultural property and vacant property were No.
1 and No. 3 on the list, respectively. There were over 800 parcels of land that were infill. He said
the average days on market for greater than 1 acre, averaged 1,308 days over the past 3 years.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff asked what the zoning was on the properties.
Mr. Friedman said it was commercial and industrial. It didn't help the City that the properties were
languishing and the City needed to understand what were the barriers.
Councilmember Clark said it was averaged over the past 3 years but the market hadn't taken off
until the past year. She asked if any of the properties were currently being considered or sold.
Mr. Friedman did not have that specific data but staff could input any number of scenarios.
Councilmember Clark said there might be 100 parcels that had been sold but it didn't provide
much information with regards to what was the trend.
Mr. Friedman said the City was certainly seeing activity around the Loop 303 and Loop 101.
Councilmember Clark didn't want to solve a problem that might not exist. She needed more and
better data because it might be driven by market conditions that the City had no control over.
Mayor Weiers said it included prime properties as well as the ones that were harder to sell
because of location.
Mr. Phelps said Centerline was where most of the properties were located and there hadn't been
much activity. The question was, was there something the City could do to assist. The discussion
was focused on properties located east of the Loop 101.
Mr. Friedman said he would be applying the policies used by the benchmark cities to the property
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 3 of 10
located at 59th Avenue and Northern. The city of Avondale would offer a 50%waiver of permit
fees and development impact fees (DIF).
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff asked when Avondale instituted the policy and what had been the affect.
Mr. Friedman said it was introduced in 2004 and the impact had not been significant.
Councilmember Clark said the fee reductions had been in place for 14 years with limited success
and asked if it was worth chasing the same thing in Glendale.
Mr. Friedman said staff had heard from developers but the City should conduct stakeholder
meetings to decide what would work for the City and what would entice the open market.
Mr. Phelps said Avondale had a singular strategy and it had a minor impact. To move the needle
in Glendale, it would not be a singular strategy. There was not just one solution that would move
the needle.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff said the areas selected were off the freeway corridor. She said areas that
were less desirable were hard to move and asked if that was what Avondale's policy was built
around.
Mr. Friedman said that was correct. He said even apartment complexes were demanding to be
located close to the freeways.
Councilmember Aldama asked if there was an advertising campaign.
Mr. Friedman did not have that information. He did not know the budget for the campaign, who
had directed it or how robust the campaign had been.
Councilmember Aldama asked what kind of campaign the City would have.
Mr. Friedman said it was up to Council to set the policy, the budget and goals such as stakeholder
meetings and a professional consultant to leverage expertise.
Mr. Phelps said it was not advantageous to have a set of incentives if they were not marketed. He
wanted to make sure it had value and it was communicated effectively across all mediums.
Avondale chose to provide incentives in its most challenging areas so it was not surprising that
there had not been an impact. A discussion was necessary about where the City wanted to offer
incentives—targeted areas or all parcels, regardless of location.
Councilmember Turner said if building permit fees were reduced and absorbed by the City, it
would have no impact on the general fund. If there were DIF reductions, it would have an impact
on the general fund. He said incentives offered would be in two categories—incentives that made
development possible, such as setbacks, and incentives that made development attractive, such
as waiving fees. Council might want to look at where and when it did the fee reductions.
Mr. Phelps said that was a good point. Zoning and land use might cause a block on
development. The City didn't want to waive fees if it didn't affect the development.
Councilmember Clark said another question was, did the City want to target challenged areas or
all areas. Council would have to decide. If all parcels were eligible, it might hinder development
in the challenged areas. Development was dependent on many issues. For example, a
supermarket project depended on income levels and in some areas of the City that was a
problem. Some projects had an environmental quality that surpassed other areas. Those issues
could not be changed but if recognized, the City could figure out ways to overcome the obstacles.
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 4 of 10
It was necessary to acknowledge there were some things that were out of the City's control.
Mr. Friedman said if Chandler's program was applied to the example and the property owner
wanted to update or develop new buildings, Chandler would pay for the demolition of existing
buildings. Chandler had expended $2 million dollars so far in demo costs. It made costs more
predictable. Chandler had also addressed zoning and building code issues`and had hired a
consultant.
Mr. Friedman said an adaptive re-use example would be Catlin Court's Brophy Theater. It was a
residence that was converted into a retail store front. That,worked for a while but the market
looked at it and found another commercial purpose and it was converted to a theater. He said it
was an example of different uses over time and the different codes applied to each use.
Mr. Phelps said with adaptive re-use, the City might have to waive requirements. There had to be
flexibility within the system to thoughtfully modify or waive conditions.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff said the City would never be able to have a blanket policy because there
were so many variables.
Mr. Friedman said the city of Phoenix established a zone and any user within the zone had many
options.
Mayor Weiers wanted to make sure the City did not go overboard on safety. He did not want to
have mandates that kept people from coming to Glendale. The City had to examine the uses.
Mr. Friedman said there was an adaptive re-use section in the Uniform Building Code (UBC).
Mr. Friedman said°Mesa's policy allowed any infill property owner to request a waiver of any
zoning requirements. Staff made a recommendation to Council and Council created an overlay.
Councilmember Clark asked when the policy was adopted and what was the success of it.
Mr. Friedman said the policy was adopted in 2001 and was ongoing.
Carol Hu, Economic Development Specialist, said the application of overlay zoning was done on a
case-by-case basis. She did not have the number of requests that had been received.
Councilmember Turner said if it was case-by-case, there would be winners and losers instead of it
applying to everyone.
Mr. Phelps said the case-by-case basis was an important tool to have. Some sites were more
attractive than others and it was in the interest of the City to look at things on a case-by-case basis
to decide what incentives to offer.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff said there could be zones where the City had certain incentives;
case-by-case in some areas; and a specific policy in other areas.
Mayor Weiers said the City should be careful of targeting certain areas and classifying it in a
certain way because it could affect land values. The City should make every possibility available.
Mr. Phelps wanted to be cautious about putting hard boundaries in place. Analysis needed to be
done to see if incentives should be based on things such as types of employment. It was
important to measure the impact to the area and adjust it accordingly. He recommended looking
at the impact and importance and then layer the incentives.
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 5 of 10
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff said the City needed to be open to waiving fees dependent upon the
project and its impact. She said there were specific ways to attract people to problem areas. A
different program would be needed for Centerline compared to property along the freeway.
Mr. Phelps said Council could identify priority areas and be more aggressive in the areas.
Mayor Weiers said Council could develop a laundry list that indicated in a certain area, certain
incentives were available.
Mr. Phelps said the Mesa policy allowed developers to present the project and prove the case for
incentives and indicate the roadblocks.
Mayor Weiers asked what the process would be—Planning and Economic Development—before
it went to Council.
Mr. Phelps said staff was not yet ready to discuss process.
Mayor Weiers asked who would review the requests and would it happen before Council got to
look at it.
Mr. Phelps said the team would understand incentives. He said the City wanted to be known for
its speed-to-market.
Mayor Weiers suggested assigning one staff member to move the developer through the entire
process. It could be frustrating if the developer had to re-educate each member of staff.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff asked if the wide-openness of Mesa was an incentive or was the fact that
there was so much uncertainty a deterrent.
Mr. Phelps said the Mesa strategy was tied to existing infill and finding ways to overcome the
barriers of new standards. Redevelopment could be much more expensive than new development
and Mesa's focus was on redevelopment. In Avondale, the focus was on new development and
'Chandler assisted with demolition.
Councilmember Clark said there was no data on what had worked and what had not worked.
Council needed that kind of data to be able to discuss whether or not it was interested in going
that route. A decision was necessary on where the focus was—new development or infill. The
policies would be different for each. She said Northern Parkway might be reconfigured which
could affect how parcels developed.
Mr. Phelps said a consultant was studying the configuration of Northern Parkway,west of the
Loop 303.
Councilmember Turner said the City had identified the Centerline District. The challenges were
identified. Council could come up with a menu of what it would be willing to do in the area and
what it would be willing to do in big box areas. He said every development should not be"let's
make a deal."
Councilmember Malnar supported involvement from the community and stakeholders.
Mr. Friedman said Phoenix's adaptive reuse policy applied to all structures permitted prior to
2000. There were tiers based on building size. Infill was considered within identified boundaries.
Councilmember Clark asked how well the policy had worked.
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 6 of 10
Mr. Friedman said his personal experience was that it worked well.
Mr. Friedman said the city of Scottsdale had two different zones and height and density applied in
one of the zones.
Mr. Friedman said the city of Yuma had felt its core was being overlooked and developed an infill
overlay district with 13 different options. It was done in-house with direction from Council.
The Council consensus was for staff to seek input from the development community through a
developer and stakeholders'forum with a professional facilitator.
Mr. Phelps said staff would come back with recommended policies for potential action.
Councilmember Turner asked if there was a budgetary impact.
Mr. Friedman said there would be a cost for the facilitator but it could be covered by the current
budget.
Councilmember Turner asked what the process would be and would it result in a report.
Mr. Friedman said it would be a combination of surveys, focus groups and meetings. He said
there would be a document for Council to review.
Councilmember Clark requested that the meetings be recorded and transcribed so Council was
able to see exactly what the stakeholders were saying.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff asked if the Urban Land Institute would be a good partner in the process
and how the benchmark cities were selected.
Mr. Friedman said the cities were selected because of their robust programs.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff asked why Peoria hadn't been included. It had been successful.
Mr. Friedman said Peoria had a large amount of unused downtown retail and staff didn't know the
plan to address that. Peoria was struggling with it.
Mr. Friedman said staff was also requesting funds for an initial inventory study.
Mr. Phelps said once staff received input from stakeholders, it might be necessary to engage a
consultant to create comprehensive infill guidelines. After the stakeholder meetings, staff would
report back to Council for discussion and from there, issue a request for proposals (RFP)for a
consultant.
The Council consensus was to proceed.
ANNEXATION
Mr. McAllen said the item was a follow-up to the special workshop held on December 11, 2018.
Mr. Cronk said the General Plan was mandated by state statute and was required to be updated
every 10 years. It was a guiding document, was not a zoning map and did not apply to specific
properties. It talked generally about land uses and was a roadmap. Zoning was applied to
specific properties. Subdivision and plats were based on zoning and implemented the zoning
documents and specific requirements. He said annexation was jurisdictional.
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 7 of 10
Mr. Cronk said the General Plan was a policy and reference document that was a guide for future
development, projects and programs. It was used to determine how/where growth should occur;
strategic investments in capital improvement; and a plan to achieve citizens' directive for
moderate, well-managed growth. It also ensured annexed properties/developments were
compatible with Luke Air Force Base.
Mr. Cronk said the Growth Element of the General Plan designated the following growth areas:
•Glendale Centerline
•Loop 101 North
•Western Area Plan (83rd— 115th Avenues)
• Luke Compatible Land Use Area
• Loop 303 Corridor—focus on shopping/employment and low residential growth
Mr. Cronk said the Goals & Policies of the Growth Element of the General Plan were:
•Well-paying, high-quality jobs
•Appropriate infrastructure
•Reasonable, responsible urban development
•Multi-modal transportation
•Each area has a unique identity
Mr. McAllen said the Loop 303 Development Group Pre-Annexation Development Agreement
(PADA) required developers to first request annexation into the City. Nothing on the western side
of the Loop 303 frontage had been annexed and on the east side, half had been annexed into the
City.
Councilmember Turner asked why that information wasn't available prior to the Woolf Logistics
annexation.
Mr. McAllen said staff didn't have the meets and bounds at that time.
Councilmember Turner said the PADA had been in place for 5 years.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff said there was a lot of the Loop 303 frontage that was not part of the
PADA. She asked what the City was doing about those properties.
Mr. McAllen said staff wanted to get Council direction on the fourth area.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff said the City should be aggressively pursuing those property owners.
Mr. McAllen asked if the direction would be to pursue income-producing properties.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff said that was correct.
Councilmember Clark said the fourth area should incorporate all of the property.
Mr. McAllen clarified that it was a half-mile on either side.
Councilmember Clark said that was correct.
Councilmember Turner asked to consider the square mile between Cotton, Citrus and Camelback
Road and Bethany Home and Sarival Avenue, Olive to Peoria.
Councilmember Clark said the City needed to focus on the Loop 303.
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 8 of 10
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff was not opposed to setting priorities.
Councilmember Turner agreed that the area in yellow was the highest priority. He was suggesting
the other two areas because the General Plan had it as residential which related to
Councilmember Clark's question regarding what was the cost of residential.
Mayor Weiers knew that the Wildlife Zoo would entertain annexation if it was not for the increased
taxes on tickets.
Councilmember Clark said a problem had been that the annexation policy required areas to bring
existing infrastructure up to City standards. That was a problem that needed to be addressed.
Mr. McAllen suggested a half mile on either side of the Loop 303 and the other areas as a phased
approach. Staff would have the consultant consider the areas so Council had enough information
to make a decision.
Councilmember Clark asked if the City had the ability to amend the General Plan to change the
areas that were residential to office or commercial.
Mr. Cronk said one major General Plan amendment was allowed per year and was usually done in
December. A super-majority of Council was required to amend the plan.
Councilmember Clark asked if the property owners or the City could initiate the amendment.
Mr. Bailey said it could be done by either. If the City initiated it, there was a Prop 207 issue and it
would be a compensable taking. It would require analysis and would require a change in zoning.
Councilmember Turner asked about the noise contours.
Mr. McAllen said there were limits on what could be done in each of the noise contours.
Mr. Friedman said there was a very detailed list of uses that described what was and was not
allowed. The City's zoning mimicked state statute.
Mr. McAllen said information would be provided to Council.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff asked if east of 127th Avenue was outside the noise contour.
Mr. McAllen said a half-mile on each side of Northern was still able to be annexed and that
included the area inside the contours.
Vice Mayor Tolmachoff said the whole idea was to plan for the future.
Councilmember Clark said if the Northern Parkway configuration was changed and the flyovers
were eliminated, it would change what could be developed at the intersections. The consultant
had to take that into consideration.
Mr. Phelps said Councilmember Clark was referring to east of the Loop 101 on Northern
Parkway. He did not know of any discussion that the configuration would be changed in that area.
Mr. McAllen would bring back the requested information to Council.
Mayor Weiers asked what was the cost of the study.
Mr. Friedman said it would be approximately$15,000.
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 9 of 10
Mr. McAllen identified the following items of consensus:
•A consultant would conduct a fiscal impact study on the fourth area
•Staff would follow-up on items of interest
• Education and discussion would continue
•Goal to review and update the annexation policy
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Weiers adjourned the meeting at 1:29 p.m.
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the
meeting of the Glendale City Council of Glendale, Arizona, held on the 29th day of January,
2018. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was
present.
Dated this 28th day of February, 2018.
Juli: Bower, MMC, City Clerk
City Council Meeting Minutes-January 29,2018 Page 10 of 10