HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 3/5/2002 * PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at
the Workshops, Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council
MINUTES
CITY OF GLENDALE
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
March 5, 2002
1:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Thomas R. Eggleston, and
Councilmembers Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M.
Goulet, H. Phillip Lieberman, and Manuel D. Martinez
ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Terry Zerkle, Assistant City Manager;
Rick Flaaen, City Attorney; and Pamela Oliveira, City Clerk
1 . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND HOME INVESTMENT
PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Ms. Gloria Santiago-Espino, Director of
Community Housing & Revitalization; and Mr. Gilbert Lopez, Neighborhood
Revitalization Manager
OTHER PRESENTERS: Ms. Lasca Beck, Chair of the Community Development
Advisory Committee
The Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) recently concluded an
extensive public application process for the Fiscal Year 2002/2003 Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships Program
(HOME). The Committee reviewed 32 applications for CDBG funds and 2 applications
for HOME funds.
CDBG
In Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the City will receive $2,097,000 in CDBG funds from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). These funds are allocated to
the City to meet the following national objectives: activities that benefit low and
moderate income individuals, activities that eliminate slum and blight, and/or activities
that address an urgent community need.
To properly administer the CDBG grant, $356,490 of the $2,097,000 entitlement (17%)
will be reserved for administration. Administrative functions include coordinating the
application process, preparing performance plans, providing sub-recipient contract
administration, and complying with federal regulations and CDBG program guidelines.
1
For housing rehabilitation and demolition activities administered by the Neighborhood
Revitalization Division, $660,000 will be reserved out of the $2,097,000 entitlement
(32%). These programs include the Single-Family Housing Rehabilitation Program,
Roof Repair/Replacement Program, and related lead-based paint testing and hazard
reduction.
The CDBG funding requests have been separated into two categories: Public Services
and Physical Improvement Projects. A maximum of 15% of the $2,097,000 entitlement
($314,550) may be allocated to Public Services. Glendale allocates the full 15% to
services that benefit seniors, youth, and victims of domestic violence, employment
programs, and programs to prevent homelessness. The funds available for allocation
to Physical Improvement projects will be $899,762. This includes $133,802 in unspent
CDBG funds from activities completed in prior years. The following table provides a
summary of the requests.
Fiscal Year 2002/2003 Entitlement $2,097,000
Public Services Physical Improvements
Number of Applications 22 10
Total FundingRequests $523,052 $840,548
Amount Available $314,550 *$899,762
*Includes $133,802 of prior year funds approved for redistribution by the Committee.
For Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the CDBG funds available for Physical Improvement
Projects ($899,762) exceeded the total funding requests. The CDAC has
recommended that two applicants receive CDBG funds in excess of the amounts
requested and that any remaining CDBG funds be allocated to the Neighborhood
Revitalization Division for contingencies.
HOME
For Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the City will receive $552,308 in HOME funds from the
Maricopa HOME Consortium. The Consortium is comprised of Maricopa County and all
of the Valley's cities, with the exception of the City of Phoenix. Maricopa County is the
lead agency of the Consortium. The purpose of the Consortium is to oversee the
administration of the HOME funds.
To properly administer the HOME program, $33,139 of the $552,308 allocation (6%) will
be reserved for administration. The administrative functions for the HOME Program are
similar to the CDBG program. The amount of HOME funds available for allocation to
activities will be $519,169.
HOME funds may only be used for housing-related activities such as first-time
homebuyer programs and housing rehabilitation. The following table provides a
summary of the requests:
2
Fiscal Year 2002/2003 Allocation $552,308
Number of Applications 2
Total Funding Requests $430,000
Amount Available $519,169
For Fiscal Year 2002/2003, the HOME funds available for distribution ($519,169)
exceeded the total funding requests. The CDAC has recommended that the two
applicants receive HOME funds in excess of the amounts requested and that any
remaining HOME funds be allocated to the Neighborhood Revitalization Division for its
housing rehabilitation programs.
Since Fiscal Year 1977/78, the City of Glendale has received over $32,893,000 in
CDBG funds. In addition, since 1992, the City has received over $5,053,596 in HOME
funds. These funds have supported numerous activities that have benefited thousands
of residents.
In late October and early November of 2001, the Neighborhood Revitalization Division
held an orientation meeting and a series of mini-workshops for prospective grant
applicants. The workshops focused on agency responsibilities and financial
accountability.
Mr. Ray Weinstein, the Vice Chair of the CDAC, met with the Glendale City Council on
November 20, 2001. At that meeting, the Council requested that the CDAC consider
funding housing projects, programs for seniors and youth, demolition activities,
employment services, and meal programs. The CDAC recommended funding for the
types of activities suggested by the City Council.
On December 19, 2001, the Committee reviewed the City Council's direction and
received the grant applications. At this meeting, the CDAC also recommended that
CDBG funds be pre-allocated to the City's housing rehabilitation programs and
demolition activities.
On January 23 and 24, 2002, the CDAC held public hearings for verbal presentations
by public service applicants. On January 30, 2002, the CDAC held a public hearing for
verbal presentations by physical improvement and HOME applicants. On February 6,
2002, the CDAC met to formulate their recommendations for Council review.
On October 11, 2001, notices of the upcoming grant cycle and orientation meeting were
mailed to prospective CDBG and HOME applicants. In addition, a public notice was
published in The Glendale Star on October 18, 2001, notifying interested parties of the
availability of funds and the orientation meeting.
On January 10 and 17, 2002, public notices were published in The Glendale Star,
advertising the public hearings. Notices were also published in the Arizona Republic on
January 9 and 16, 2002.
The CDBG and HOME programs are federally funded. The HOME program requires a
25% match from non-federal funds. For those HOME projects that are administered by
the City, an annual match allocation of $25,000 is provided in the General Fund
budget. The CDBG program does not have a match requirement.
3
This item was presented for review of the funding recommendations from the
Community Development Advisory Committee and to provide staff with direction.
Councilmember Clark questioned Ms. Beck regarding several requests which were
recommended for complete funding. One of those requests was from the Children's
Center for Neuro-Developmental Studies. She did not see how providing additional
parking for this facility would directly benefit the community. She suggested that those
funds be utilized for other requests that provide a direct benefit. Ms. Beck explained
the Committee's evaluation of the benefit of providing the additional parking. She also
noted that the recommended amount for two of the HOME requests was over the
requested amount. Ms. Beck responded that the Committee chose to allocate the
requested amount, plus the remaining unallocated balance in the fund. Councilmember
Clark asked why those unallocated funds were not allocated to neighborhood
revitalization.
Mayor Scruggs questioned Ms. Beck regarding the use of unallocated funds. Ms. Beck
responded that the Committee faced some tough decisions and they felt that their
recommendations were appropriate. The two HOME requests from Community
Services of Arizona, Inc. and Los Vecinos Housing Development, Inc. focused on first-
time home buyers and acquiring vacant lots to construct new homes.
Councilmember Goulet explained that the additional parking at the Neuro-
Developmental Studies facility would address a traffic safety issue. He said he
supported the recommendation to fund the request.
Councilmember Lieberman noted that the Committee had recommended funding in full
the request of the West Valley Child Crisis Center. He said he supported this funding.
Councilmember Martinez noted that this was the first time additional funds were
available in a funding category. He inquired about funding from other agencies for
these project/services. Ms. Beck responded that entities requesting funds do receive
funding from other agencies. The Committee includes other funding sources in its
evaluation criteria.
Mayor Scruggs expressed the City Council's appreciation for the Committee's efforts
and she directed that the recommendations be brought to a Regular City Council
Meeting.
2. REQUEST BY ORANGEWOOD WEST FOR INCLUSION IN THE SEWER
MAIN EXTENSION PROGRAM
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Tim Ernster, Deputy City Manager; Mr.
Larry Broyles, City Engineer; and Mr. Glenn Compton, Senior Civil Engineer.
As a result of the Bond Election passage in November of 1999, the Glendale City
Council adopted a formal process for requests received from neighborhoods for the
installation of main line sewers to serve areas within Glendale currently using septic
systems.
4
The City of Glendale will construct main line sewers and the service taps up to the
dedicated right-of-way at no cost to the property owner, subject to meeting the proper
application requirements. The property owner will still be responsible for paying the
sewer impact fee, obtaining permits, and installing the service line from the house to the
new system, and abandoning their septic system.
Mr. Brian K. Mathias, a homeowner in the Orangewood West subdivision, submitted a
request to participate in the sewer main extension program for the area on either side of
79 Lane from Orangewoog to Myrtle Avenues. Mr. Mathias petitioned 18 of the 19
homes on either side of 79 Lane that would potentially be served by the sewer main
extension in this area. Sixteen of the properly owners are in favor of the program and
would be willing to enter into an agreement with the City to connect to the sewer and
pay the sewer impact fee in advance of the design of the sewer. All of the 18
homeowner§ signed a petition saying they would not object to the construction of a
sewer in 79t" Lane.
Engineering staff verified that the signatures on the petitions matched the ownership
shown on the tax assessor's records.
Orangewood West is not in competition with any other neighborhoods for inclusion in
the Sewer Main Extension program at this time. When more than one application for
inclusion in the Sewer Main Extension Program is received, priority is given to the
applicant who meets the most criteria of the program.
Although Orangewood West is the only applicant for the program at this time, staff did
complete an evaluation to determine how they meet the criteria of the program. The
following is a summary of how Orangewood West fits the evaluation criteria for the
program and is provided for information only. Orangewood West has not provided any
documentation that shows any of the properties to be a high potential for a public safety
concern, such as ground water or surface contamination from a failing septic system.
However, they have noted concern over the age of their septic systems and the
increased frequency of pumping to maintain their systems. There are no properties
located within close proximity to the City's domestic water wells. The closest City well is
over 1,980 feet from the closest property, which is well beyond the 300-foot required.
Eighty four percent of Orangewood West homeowners have agreed to pay the sewer
impact fee and connect to the sewer within one year of completion. This is above the
minimum of 40% required for the program. A cost/benefit analysis was done to
determine the cost per property to provide the sewer service to the proposed area.
Based on the conceptual design of the sewer main, the approximate design and
construction cost would be approximately $308,000 to serve 19 properties, which
equates to $16,210.53 per properly.
The Sewer Main Extension program was presented at the May 30, 2000 Council
meeting and the Council adopted a resolution.
Since the approval of the program, notification has gone out in newspaper articles and
the program has been discussed at various neighborhood meetings. Staff sent out a
mailing in August of 2000 to individual property owners that were identified as being on
septic systems. Engineering Department staff provided program information and
petitions. They also met with neighborhood groups to help various neighborhoods
participate in the sewer main extension program. Various areas and subdivisions,
including Secluded Acres, Arrowhead Valley and Arrowhead Estates have circulated
petitions since the program was introduced. However, this is only the third
5
neighborhood since Hidden Manor and Del Ray Farms to successfully gather the
necessary support to meet the program requirements.
The cost of $308,000 is available in the Sewer Main Extension Bond Fund for the
construction of this project.
This item was presented to provide direction to staff.
Councilmember Clark said 100% of the owners of currently occupied houses, with the
exception of one person who is selling their house, support the request. She said the
residents are willing to continue with their current septic system until the City can
address the issue.
In response to Councilmember Martinez' question, Mr. Compton said the sewer impact
fee for a one-inch meter totals $2,800 per lot. Mr. Broyles said Mr. Brian Mathias had
indicated that 3/4 inch services would service the lots; therefore the impact fee would be
lower. He said property owners are still responsible for abandoning their septic system
and extending service from their house to the property line.
Councilmember Martinez asked if the cost of connecting to the system was similar for
all neighborhoods. Mr. Broyles explained that the cost of sewer line alignment depends
on the location of the water mains.
Councilmember Lieberman said extending service from the septic systems to the street
would be the biggest expense because most of the septic systems are located in the
back of properties. Mr. Compton agreed with Councilmember Lieberman. He stated
that septic systems are typically, but not always, located in the back.
Councilmember Frate asked if they would be able to coordinate this project with any
other street improvement projects. Mr. Broyles said there are no street improvement
projects currently scheduled for the area. He stated that they typically do some type of
resurfacing once the sewer line is installed.
Councilmember Martinez asked if it would be less expensive for the homeowners if their
septic systems were located in the front. Mr. Broyles responded in the affirmative. He
explained that the length of service line needed is the most significant cost factor.
Councilmember Martinez questioned whether they could determine the location of the
septic systems in Granada Estates to see if it could raise their interest level. Mr.
Compton said, while that information could be obtained, it is likely the majority of the
septic systems would be located in the back of the property.
Vice Mayor Eggleston expressed his opinion that they should go forward with the
request. The Council agreed with Vice Mayor Eggleston.
3. GLENDALE GATEWAY AND NORTHERN CROSSINGS DEVELOPMENT
UPDATE
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Jim Colson, Economic Development
Director.
6
OTHER PRESENTERS: Mr. Steve Ellman, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
The Ellman Companies; and Mr. Jeff Hecht, Director of Public Affairs of The Ellman
Companies.
The purpose of this item was for City staff and representatives from the Ellman Group
to provide an update on the Coyotes - Glendale Gateway and the Northern Crossings
development projects. The Ellman Group will provide information regarding the general
status of the projects, what has transpired to date, groundbreaking information, and the
tentative construction schedule.
In April of 2001, the Council unanimously approved a Memorandum of Agreement with
the Coyotes and The Ellman Companies to develop the Glendale Gateway
Arena/Mixed-Use Project and redevelop Manistee Town Center.
Council directed staff to negotiate development agreements for two development
projects that met the mutual objectives of the Coyotes/Ellman Companies and the City
of Glendale. Staff has been working with the Coyotes/Ellman Companies to structure
the agreement in such a manner as to ensure a positive, long-term working relationship
between all parties.
As a result of the action taken by the Council, the City of Glendale will be the home to
the National Hockey League (NHL) Coyotes and a mixed-use development, consisting
of at least 1.6 million square feet of diverse retail, entertainment, dining, office and
residential development. In addition, The Ellman Companies have agreed to redevelop
the Manistee Town Center site, now called Northern Crossings, which will result in a
major improvement to the City Center area and provide a new amenity to the City.
Staff is working with the Mayor and Council, as well as various other community groups
to discuss the project and answer questions.
The City of Glendale has dedicated a portion of its web site to these projects and has
also established a special telephone hotline for those without Internet access.
The City has entered into a Memorandum of Agreement with The Ellman Companies to
develop Glendale Gateway and Northern Crossings. The City's financial commitment is
to provide funding of up to $180 million, over a thirty-year period, in exchange for a
specific amount of development (at least 1.6 million square feet of diverse retail,
entertainment, dining, office and residential development) according to the terms and
conditions which will be outlined in the development agreement.
The planned development will result in increased revenue, which will help support
general services, pay the debt service on the $180 million, and provide additional police
and fire service throughout the City. This project will also accelerate development in
the Glendale Gateway Area, resulting in increased amenities, job opportunities, and tax
base; and significantly increase property values and assessed valuation.
This item was presented for information, discussion and staff direction.
7
Glendale Gateway
Mr. Ellman said they were working diligently and reviewing various aspects of the site
plan. He reported that architectural and engineering firms reviewing the site plan had
requested limited changes. He said they were currently running financial models and
timetable lines on each of the suggested modifications.
Mr. Hecht said one of the first changes they would propose is a name change. He
stated that they were currently working with marketing and public relations people to
choose a name. He said they were reviewing two potential dates for a groundbreaking:
March 29t or April 2nd. He explained that they were attempting to compile a VIP (very
important people) attendance list and coordinate a groundbreaking ceremony that
coincides with the team's schedule.
Mr. Colson stated that the Planned Area Development was currently in the review
process and the contract with HOK Architects had been signed. He said the Perini
Construction building contract was in negotiation and expected to be signed. He noted
that timetables from HOK Architects and Perini Construction identify a 17-to-20-month
period to build the arena. He stated that they expected to have a guaranteed maximum
price by May 15tH. He said it appeared that the arena would be roughly 601,000 square
feet and consist of 67 suites, 12 party suites, 726 corporate seats, 8,428 lower bowl
seats, and 5,644 upper bowl seats. Mr. Colson noted that the seating capacity for
concerts and family venues would be higher. He said they were in the final stages of
signing two national marketing and leasing negotiation contracts, one with an
entertainment group and one with specialty retail groups. He stated that they had
committed for a space at the International Council of Shopping Centers and were
developing a scaled, fully lit, and animated project model. He said they were also
starting to design marketing brochures, as well as a web site.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if they had considered holding a naming contest. Mr.
Ellman responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Lieberman noted that March 29th
is Good Friday and a planned budget workshop was scheduled for April 2'. Mr. Ellman
explained that the proposed dates were based strictly on the team's schedule. He
assured the Council that they would not make a decision on the date withgut the
Council's input. Mayor Scruggs suggested that they remove March 29t from
consideration. She explained that the Council has, in the past, received very negative
feedback when public events were scheduled on days of significance. Mr. Ellman
assured the Council that they would work with Mr. Colson to identify a series of possible
dates.
Councilmember Goulet said a number of people had asked if they were still on track to
open at the start of the 2003 season. Mr. Ellman said it was too early to forecast an
opening date. He saidit was anticipated that the opening of the hockey season would
change to October 15th and it might be possible for the team to play their first 10 to 15
games on the road. He said the National Hockey League (NHL) would have to know
the arena's status by next May, when the season schedule is confirmed. He stated that
they would push everyone involved to make the season opening. He noted that they
would pay a penalty to America West Arena if they had to start the season there.
Councilmember Clark asked how groundbreaking could proceed without PAD approval.
She said doing so would send the wrong message to residents who have questions
about the PAD. Mr. Colson said the development agreement contemplated that there
would be a groundbreaking prior to PAD approval. He said any permits received to do
the groundbreaking would be at risk and there would be no major funding of the bonds
8
until the PAD was approved. Councilmember Clark asked when the annexation would
be completed. Mr. Flaaen clarified that the annexation for the Coyotes project had
already been completed.
Mayor Scruggs asked how the number of seats would increase for concerts or family
events. Mr. Ellman explained that additional seats would be placed on the floor of the
arena.
Northern Crossing Development (Formerly Manistee Town Center)
Mr. Ellman stated that they were in final sales contract negotiations with two major
users. He suggested that the City consider holding a groundbreaking ceremony for
Northern Crossing as well. He noted that it was an achievement deserving of
community recognition. He said they were also negotiating with several pad users and
tenants. He noted that they expected to have the financing finalized very soon.
In response to a question posed by Mayor Scruggs, Mr. Ellman said they had basic
commitments on approximately 400,000 of the 500,000 square feet of space.
Vice Mayor Eggleston reported that that residents located north of the site had
expressed their desire for nice restaurants. Mr. Ellman said they were talking with
representatives of a number of "sit-down" restaurants. Vice Mayor Eggleston said the
residents also want the building and landscaping to have a first-class appearance. Mr.
Ellman assured Vice Mayor Eggleston that it was their intention to develop a first-class
site.
Councilmember Goulet agreed that Northern Crossing warrants a groundbreaking. He
stated that a number of neighborhoods would welcome the opportunity to attend. He
said it is important to note that there will be a number of retail and dining tenants.
Councilmember Clark asked if the 400,000 square feet includes major tenants. Mr.
Ellman responded in the affirmative. He noted that the two major tenants make up
approximately 350,000 square feet. He explained that the ultimate size of each tenant
will determine the total number of available tenant spaces. He stated that they were
attempting to attract two or three 10,000-15,000 square foot sub-major retail shops.
Vice Mayor Eggleston noted that the bite plan also called for stores along 55th Avenue
and pad sites along Northern and 59t Avenues. Mr. Ellman agreed with Vice Mayor
Eggleston.
Councilmember Martinez asked when the cleanup of the site would be completed. Mr.
Colson stated that the City was currently in the final stages of cleanup.
Mr. Ellman said they would soon have a set of schematic drawings of the arena for
review by the Council.
Councilmember Frate asked Mr. Ellman how he was able to get Mr. Gary Bettman,
National Hockey League Commissioner, to agree to attend the groundbreaking. Mr.
Ellman explained that, although Mr. Bettman had offered to come, his attendance would
depend on the ultimate date chosen for the ceremony. He said they might recommend
that Mr. Bettman come after the groundbreaking so as not to take anything away from
the City and Council.
9
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m.
10