HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 5/14/2002 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA,
HELD TUESDAY, MAY 14, 2002, AT 7:00 P.M.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, with Vice Mayor
Thomas R. Eggleston and the following Councilmembers present: Joyce V. Clark,
Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet, and Manuel D. Martinez. Councilmember H. Philip
Lieberman was absent.
Also present were Ed Beasley, City Manager; Terry Zerkle, Assistant City
Manager; Rick Flaaen, City Attorney; and Pamela Oliveira, City Clerk.
COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE VII, SECTION 6(c) OF THE GLENDALE CHARTER
A statement was filed by the City Clerk that the fourteen resolutions and three
ordinances to be considered at the meeting were available for public examination and
the title posted at City Hall more than 72 hours in advance of the meeting.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 23, 2002 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to dispense with the
reading of the minutes of the April 23, 2002 City Council Meeting, as each
member of the Council had been provided copies in advance, and approve them
as written. The motion carried unanimously.
PROCLAMATIONS AND AWARDS
NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK, MAY 19-25, 2002
The week of May 19 to May 25 is being designated as National Public Works
Week. The purpose of this designation is to honor the qualified and dedicated
personnel of Glendale's Public Works Group, along with the many other Municipal,
County, State and other public employees who provide these needed services every
day. The City of Glendale salutes the Public Works employees who manage the City's
water, sewer, transportation, and solid waste systems, as well as the City's public
buildings, parks and recreation facilities. These services are routinely provided with no
fanfare or public awareness. Public Works personnel are among the first responders
during emergencies and disasters, including those caused by man, as well as those of
natural origin. This year, in light of the events of September 11, 2001, the City of
Glendale would especially like to recognize all of those Public Works personnel who
work above and beyond the call of duty during emergencies and disasters, in order to
maintain, or quickly restore, needed public works services and who also work diligently
to facilitate clean up efforts after the crisis is over.
1
Mayor Scruggs proclaimed the week of May 19 to 25, 2002 as Public Works
Week in Glendale. She presented Mr. Rod Ramos, the current President of the
Arizona Chapter of the American Public Works Association, with the proclamation.
Mr. Ramos thanked the Mayor and Council on behalf of the Public Works
Association and the Public Works employees throughout the State.
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK MAY 12=18 2002
The National Trust for Historic Preservation, chartered by Congress in 1949, is a
private, non-profit organization with more than a quarter million members. It provides
leadership, education, and advocacy to save America's diverse historic places and
revitalize communities. The National Trust has six regional offices and 20 historic sites
and works with thousands of local community groups nationwide.
The week of May 12-18, 2002, is the celebration of the 31st annual National
Historic Preservation Week. "Preserving the Spirit of Place" is the theme of the week
long celebration, which has been sponsored bi-annually by the National Trust for
Historic Preservation since 1971 . Every community has a spirit of place that identifies it
as special and unique. A community's spirit of place sets it apart from other
communities. The spirit of place attracts tourists, contributes to the area's stability and
livability, and gives residents a sense of connection with their shared heritage.
Preservation Week 2002 calls on us to do all we can to recognize, save, and enhance
the irreplaceable features that give each community its distinctive character.
Sahuaro Ranch, Manistee Ranch, the Catlin Court Historic District, the Beet
Sugar Factory, the First National Bank of Glendale building, and the Glendale Woman's
Club clubhouse exemplify the City of Glendale's uniqueness. These five sites and one
district are all listed on the National Register and are part of Glendale's rich heritage.
The Planning Department acts as the liaison to the City's Historic Preservation
Commission (HPC). The HPC meets monthly to work on the activities which the
Commission has identified as part of its annual work program. The 2002 Work
Program includes Phase 2 of the Manistee Ranch video project, the 2002 Ruth Byrne
Award, the Certified Local Government Grant Application, and development of a
community awareness program for increasing citizen interest in the preservation of
Glendale's heritage. As needed, the Historic Preservation Commission conducts public
hearings on proposed construction or demolition within the Catlin Court Historic District.
Mayor Scruggs issued a proclamation recognizing "National Historic Preservation
Week 2002 — Preserving the Spirit of Place" in Glendale for May 12-18, 2002. She
presented Mr. Philip Reina, a member of the Historic Preservation Commission and
members of the Historic Preservation Commission with the National Historic
Preservation Week proclamation.
2
6u!uu!baq `i eA auo to potted e aol s!seq „papeau se„ ue uo pap!noaci aq hUM aovues
sial •aa!dxe of lnoge s! lent loealuoo 6u!ls!xe ue to p!q-aa a s! siyl an lnog6noJUl
suoile°ol snouen le sap' aaleM to luawaoeldaa ao a!edai all aol alepua10 to Apo eql Aq
paleaaua6 slno '1!Illn uo go led lleudse lueuewaad e to luaweoeid eql pue pied lleudse
Aaeaodwal JO asanoo paseq ale6aa66e Aue to lenowaa an Jo ls!suoo saledaa Lions
•s.pedaa lno Ain UlpM luawpedea se!ph!ln eql Aiddns of pan!eoaa aleM sp!q anod
SHIVd2bl lflO Alllllfl 'S1-Z0 al8 dO aldVMV
"E80`E9l$
to !elol e aol adeosleallS aooel woal spun 6u!1U6li aelos 1-,8 pue `sue° gseal zZ `sauouaq
Ez `saallaus snq 61 }o aseuoand eql anoidde of seM uoilepuewwooaa aul
"00178-1098-99 aagwnN luno°°y `la6pnq luewpudea uo!lelaodsueal ail u!
pala6pnq s! `aaeus pool L 1-9`ZE$ ao '%0z 6u!u!ewaa aul •00-090X-06-ZV Pue ZO-SlOX
-06-ZV slueJO uo!leals!u!wpy l!sueal paged woa} s! `99P`OE l$ JO `9/008 Jol 6uipunl
`£80`891-$ to lsoo lelol eql 1-O •aanpuani dols snq to asegoand eql Jol algel!ene ale spunj
lepdeo A1!a pue sluea6 (yid) uo!leals!u!wpy l!sueal Ieaapad to uo!leu!gwoo v
-spun 6u!1U6!l
aelos pue `aanpwnl `saallaus eql to uo!lellelsu! pue uo!leaedaad alts OUT aol AIaleaedas
loealuo° ll!M Apo aul Al!O OUT lnoU6noJUl suo!leool snouen le ale sluawanoadw! Jo}
pe!pluep! saps dols snq aql •saallaus ieuo!6aa MaU OUT uo pallelsu! aq Il!M spun 6u!jg6iI
aelos 61 6u!u!ewaa aul •6ullg6ll Aue aneq IOU op AIluanno Uo!UM saallaus 6u!ls!xa
uo palielsu! aq Il!M spun 6u!1U6li aelos eql to ueell!d •880`C9l$ s! spun 6u!TU6!l aelos
17E pue `sue° Useal ZZ `sauouaq EZ `saallaus snq 61 to asegoind eql J(341500 OUl .spun
asagl uo loud palunooslp e an!aoei II!M alepuelO to Apo eqj 1700-1-O (ddb) lesodoad
and lsenbatj sl! 6u!sn alepua10 to Apo NUT Ul!M `esegoind an!leaad000 slUT of peei6e
seq x!uaoud to Apo aql •sseooid p!q an!l!ladwoo a g6noJUl aOanos alas e se xivaoud
to Apo OUT Aq paleu6!sap ueaq sal `aanlluanj dols snq pue Jallaus paanloelnuew
OUT to Jopuan eql `adeosleaaig aooel •alepuel0 u! asn u! Apeaale colo° pue u6!sep
leuo!6aa awes au1 aq IUM spun 6u!jg6!l _egos pue `aanlluanJ `saallaus aql •sa°!naas
dols snq to puewap pasee ou! OUl Jol ap!noad of Japao u! luawd!nba pue aanl!uanl
palelaa pue saallaus dols snq asegoand of a){!1- pinoM alepua10 Jo Apo aql
3EJf11INbIld dOIS Sf18 dO dSVHO1:If1d I:10J 1VA0addv 1-
ell!l pue aagwnu Aq 51- U6noaUl
9 saagwnN wall epua6y peal Van 40 `ea!an!IO wed "siAi pue 'aim pue aagwnu
Aq g U6noaUl 1- saagwnN wall epue6y peal `Ja6euet ApO `Aelseee p3 •aW
VON19V 1N3SNO0
•AJols!U U°u scalepueIo to Apo aul Aofue pue las of Apunlaoddo
OUT a)fel of auo/Gane pa6eanooue aH •uo!leweloojd OUT ao} younoO pue JoAeiN
OUT pa>lueUl `uo!ss!wwoa uo!lenaasaid °uols!H OUT Jo lleuaq uo `eu!ej JV1l
July 1, 2002 and continuing for a one-year period. The bid specifications contain an
option clause that will permit the City, at the discretion of the City Manager, to extend
this agreement for four additional years, in one-year increments.
Pricing under this solicitation is 20% lower than the City's current contract. This
will result is an annual cost savings of approximately $70,000. Funding is available in
the Utility Department's operating budget, Account Number 50-6442-7330. The lowest
responsive bid was submitted by Specialized Surfacing Utility Paving and Construction
LLC.
The recommendation was to award the contract for utility cut repair to
Specialized Surfacing Utility Cut Paving and Construction LLC in the amount not to
exceed $347,096.49, taxes included.
3. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT — 2002 ARTERIAL STREET
LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS
This was a request for City Council award of a construction contract to Anncole
Contracting Corporation, in the amount of $256,764.40, for the installation of landscape
and irrigation improvements for the following street rights-of-way:
Olive Avenue — 55th Avenue — 57th Avenue (north and south side)
51st Avenue — Mountain View Road — Brown Avenue) (east side) (Olive — Peoria
Avenues)
67th Avenue — Vogel Avenue — Mountain View Road (east side) (Olive — Peoria
Avenues)
51St Avenue — North of Kings Avenue — Paradise Lane (west side) (Greenway —
Bell Roads)
This project is part of the City's Fiscal Year 2001-2002 Arterial
Landscaping/Beautification Program. The streetscape improvements included in the
project involve the planting of street trees and shrubs, and the installation of ground
cover materials and automatic irrigation systems. For the purpose of project and cost
efficiency, the Transportation Department requested the installation of traffic signal
interconnect conduit along Olive Avenue from 55th to 57th Avenues (south side), 51st
Avenue from Mountain View Road to Brown Avenue (east side) and 67th Avenue from
Vogel Avenue to Mountain View Road.
Three bids were received and opened on April 11, 2002. Sunburst Landscaping,
Inc. submitted the lowest bid in the amount of $164,318.18, but subsequently withdrew
its bid on April 12, 2002, due to a mathematical error. The second lowest qualified and
licensed bidder was Anncole Contracting Corporation that submitted a bid of
$256,764.40. The City's design consultant and Engineering Department staff reviewed
4
the bids and qualifications of the bidders and recommended award of the contract to
Anncole Contracting Corporation, a responsive and responsible bidder.
Funds for this project are available in the Fiscal Year 2001-2002 Capital
Improvement Program, Street Beautification Account Number 62-8559-8300. However,
a transfer of funds, in the amount of $54,605, needs to be made from Signal
Computerization Account Number 61-9546-8330 into the project account to cover the
cost of installation of the traffic signal interconnect conduit. Anncole Contracting
Corporation has previously performed work for the City and has a good understanding
of the work required.
The recommendation was to approve the transfer of funds and award the
construction contract to Anncole Contracting Corporation, in the amount of
$256,764.40.
4. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT –
COMPREHENSIVE WATER FACILITIES PLANNING AND DESIGN PROJECT
– PHASE I — -- ---- ----
This was a request for City Council approval of a professional services
agreement with the firm of Black & Veatch, in an amount not to exceed $786,616, for
performance of the engineering services needed to complete a Water System Master
Plan and Facility Process Evaluation for the City. This work is Phase I of a
Comprehensive Water Facilities Planning and Design project, which is ultimately
intended to provide the City of Glendale with adequate water supply and water
treatment plant capacity through the year 2025.
In May of 2001, the City of Glendale Water Treatment System Needs Study
report was completed by Black & Veatch. The main purpose of the May 2001 report
was to provide probable project cost information for use in development of the Capital
Improvements Program (CIP) needed for water and sewer rate setting. The key
infrastructure component identified in the May 2001 report was a proposed new
Western Glendale Water Treatment Plant. This plant would have an initial capacity of
10 million gallons per day (MGD) and be expandable to 15 MGD. Staff proceeded with
implementing this recommendation by initiating a Qualification Based Selection process
to select an engineering consultant to perform the site selection and prepare the design
for this plant.
However, subsequent to completion of the report, other concerns and factors
arose which made it imperative that a more comprehensive investigation of the City's
water supply be performed before implementation of the May 2001 recommendations.
The major new factor that developed subsequent to report completion is the potential of
obtaining water treatment plant capacity (by renting, leasing or buying) from the City of
Peoria's new water treatment plant near the end of the Arizona Canal. Because of
these factors, it appeared prudent to take a more comprehensive look at the City's
water supply needs.
5
On September 4, 2001, utilizing the Engineering Department's consultant
database, a Request for Letter of Interest (RFI) was sent to more than ninety
companies in the database that had listed expertise in water engineering. In response
to this RFI, five companies sent Letters of Interest and a copy of the project Request for
Proposal (RFP) was sent to each of these companies on October 17, 2001. On
November 21, 2001, four proposals were received. These four proposals were
reviewed and ranked by eleven City staff members, including one Deputy City Manager,
four representatives from the Engineering Department, four representatives from the
Utilities Department, and two representatives from the Environmental Resources
Department. Based on the proposal reviews and rankings, the firm of Black & Veatch
was selected as having presented the best qualifications and team and project
approach to complete the work required.
Subsequent to this selection process, City staff negotiated a scope of services
and fees with Black & Veatch for Phase I of the project services. During these
negotiations, staff met with Black & Veatch on several occasions in order to ensure that
the scope of services was comprehensive, as well as to refine the fee estimate to
ensure that that the City receives the most cost effective system possible. Staff also
met with City of Peoria staff on at least two occasions (one meeting included Black and
Veatch) to discuss possible cooperative arrangements between the cities of Glendale
and Peoria regarding water supply. Because scope of work and fee adjustments were
made as the result of nearly every meeting held, it took approximately three months to
develop the final scope of work and fee for services.
During Phase I, Black & Veatch will evaluate the City's water production facilities
to determine what improvements are needed to meet water demands, as well as
Federal, State, and City water quality objectives, and City cost objectives. Black and
Veatch will also recommend what water distribution systems are needed to assure
water supply and maintain water quality. They will evaluate inclusion of additional water
supply sources, both groundwater and surface water, from within the City of Glendale,
as well as from outside Glendale. Furthermore, Black & Veatch will identify preliminary
alternative sites for a possible Western Glendale Water Treatment Plant. At or near the
completion of Phase I, staff will negotiate an agreement amendment with Black and
Veatch to cover Phase II design services work. The exact scope of work and fee for
Phase II will be determined during Phase I design and the amendment covering Phase
II work will be brought to Council for approval.
Funds for this project are available in the Fiscal Years 2001-2002 and the 2002-
2003 Capital Improvements Program Budgets, Utilities Funds, New Water Treatment
Plant, Account Number 50-8056-8300.
The recommendation was to approve the professional services agreement with
Black & Veatch, in the amount of $786,616.
6
5. REQUEST FOR CONTINGENT FUND TRANSFER
At its meeting held on April 23, 2002, the City Council approved an Agreement in
Lieu of Condemnation with the Leona Group Arizona, L.L.C., providing for the early
termination of the Leona Group's lease to operate the Maya High School at the former
Manistee Town Center site. The agreement requires the City to pay to the Leona
Group, on or before May 21, 2002, the total amount of $611,000 for the Leona Group's
tenant improvements to the Manistee site and relocation expenses.
During May of 2001, the City of Glendale acquired the 54 acre Manistee Town
Center property. When the City acquired the property, Maya High School had a lease
in place to use the school facility. The lease agreement with Maya High School was
upheld until a relocation solution was agreed upon by Maya High School officials, the
Leona Group, and the City of Glendale.
Staff was requesting that the Council authorize a transfer of $611,000 from the
Contingency Fund, Account Number 01-2450-7000, to the Manistee account, Account
Number 01-2485-7330, so that payment can be made to the Leona Group. This
transfer is necessary for the City to take possession of the final parcel of the former
Manistee Town Center and begin demolition of the Maya High School site.
The recommendation was to approve the transfer of $611,000 from Contingency
Fund Account Number 01-2450-7000, to Manistee Account Number 01-2485-7330, for
the payment to the Leona Group Arizona, L.L.C., of $611,000 required pursuant to the
Agreement in Lieu of Condemnation approved on April 23, 2002.
It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Frate, to approve the
recommended actions on Consent Agenda Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The motion
carried unanimously.
CONSENT RESOLUTIONS
6. GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANT FOR UNDERAGE
DRINKING ENFORCEMENT
In January of 2001, the Glendale Police Department was offered and received a
grant for $20,000 from the Governor's Office of Highway Safety. The grant provided
overtime funding to be used for targeting persons under the age of 21 years who
purchase, possess, and/or consume spirituous liquor. In addition, the funds were used
for enforcement activities targeting persons 21 years and over who assist persons
under the legal drinking age with purchasing, possessing, and/or consuming spirituous
liquor.
The Glendale Police Department is now applying for second year funding in the
amount of $50,000 and will continue to participate in monthly enforcement activities
directed at underage drinking of spirituous liquor.
7
The Glendale Police Department will also continue conducting enforcement
activities at various locations within the State of Arizona, which may or may not be
limited to the City of Glendale. The enforcement locations are at the discretion of the
Glendale Police Department.
Each enforcement action may include any of the following components:
• Sobriety checkpoints.
• Monitoring desert and residential parties.
• Site inspections of bars, restaurants, and other businesses with a liquor
license.
• Covert Underage Buying (CUB) Program.
• Monitor high school and college campuses.
There is no requirement for City-match funds.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for, and accept, a grant from the
Governor's Office of Highway Safety for overtime funds totaling $20,000.
Resolution No. 3556 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION AND ACCEPTING THE
GRANT OFFER FROM THE ARIZONA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF HIGHWAY
SAFETY TO SUPPORT OVERTIME ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES BY THE
GLENDALE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ADDRESS CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL
BY UNDERAGE PERSONS.
7. GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANT FOR THE PURCHASE
OF THREE UNMARKED VEHICLES WITH POLICE PACKAGES
The Governor's Office of Highway Safety has funds available to purchase
unmarked vehicles with police packages. These vehicles are to be used to target
aggressive drivers.
Proactive traffic enforcement efforts involving the City sponsored "It's Our Town,
Please Slow Down"campaign were possible through a collaborative effort involving the
Glendale Police Department and the City of Glendale Marketing Department. This
campaign was a success in terms of educating the public about traffic safety, and the
City saw a reduction in the overall accident rate, which decreased less than 1% from
2000 to 2001 .
8
The traffic enforcement units, motorcycle units and marked patrol district cars,
utilize high visibility presence, along with enforcement efforts, to educate the public,
deter speeding, red light running, and lane change violations. Although these marked
units make their presence known when they are deployed in a particular area, the
overall effectiveness of these marked units is limited. Drivers who normally drive
aggressively, tend to obey traffic laws when in the presence of a marked unit. Police
traffic enforcement in a more non-traditional manner is necessary to apprehend
aggressive drivers who endanger motorists when the visible deterrent of a marked unit
is not present. This form of apprehension, along with public awareness, will deter
speeding, red light running, and lane change violations attributed to aggressive drivers
even when police officers are not present; ultimately reducing traffic collisions.
The Glendale Police Department is requesting $77,604 from the Governor's
Office of Highway Safety to procure equipment to create an unmarked/undercover
traffic car in each sector of the City to address the issues of speed, red light running,
and lane change enforcement, traffic collision reduction efforts, and DUI (driving while
under the influence) enforcement. The goal is to reduce speed, red light running, and
lane change violations, reduce the traffic collision rate, and apprehend aggressive
drivers.
There is no match or additional costs to the City of Glendale associated with
accepting this funding. The funding cannot be used to supplant other governmental
funds that would otherwise be available to provide traffic enforcement services.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for and accept the grant award from
the State of Arizona, Governor's Office of Highway Safety.
Resolution No. 3557 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION AND ACCEPTING THE
GRANT OFFER FROM THE ARIZONA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF HIGHWAY
SAFETY FOR THE PURCHASE OF THREE UNMARKED VEHICLES WITH POLICE
PACKAGES TO BE USED TO TARGET AGGRESSIVE DRIVERS.
8. SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS
The Police Department currently has five School Resource Officers assigned to
various high schools and elementary schools in the Glendale Union High School
District, the Glendale Elementary School District, the Alhambra School District, and the
Deer Valley Unified School District. The School Resource Program began in 1992, with
one officer being assigned to the Barcelona Primary School. In 1999, two officers were
added to the program and assigned to Independence High School and Deer Valley
High School. In 2001, two more officers were added to the program and assigned to
Challenger Middle School and Apollo High School.
9
These contracts will continue the assignment of one officer to each of the
schools during the 2002-2003 school year. The assigned officer participates in
educational programs that help students deal successfully with peer pressure, child
abuse, gangs, and other educational areas. The officer will investigate cases of school-
related criminal activities and assist school administrators in addressing these matters.
The City is responsible for the officers' salaries; however the school districts
reimburse the City $36,000 towards each of their salaries. The officers work on
campus while the school is in session. During the summer and other recreational
breaks, the officers complete duties as assigned by the Police Department. This type
of partnership helps the Police Department continue its educational efforts in local
schools, while increasing the visibility and presence in the community, at a low cost with
no decline in other service levels.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt five
resolutions authorizing the City Manager to enter into intergovernmental agreements
with the Glendale Union High School District, the Glendale Elementary School District,
the Alhambra School District, and the Deer Valley Unified School District for assignment
of a police officer at Apollo High School, Independence High School, Barcelona Primary
School, Challenger Middle School, and Deer Valley High School.
Resolution No. 3558 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE GLENDALE UNION SCHOOL
DISTRICT FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF ONE POLICE OFFICER AT APOLLO HIGH
SCHOOL TO AID IN REDUCING CRIME ON THE SCHOOL CAMPUS THROUGH
EDUCATION, POSITIVE INTERACTION AND ENFORCEMENT.
Resolution No. 3559 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE GLENDALE UNION SCHOOL
DISTRICT FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF ONE POLICE OFFICER AT INDEPENDENCE
HIGH SCHOOL TO AID IN REDUCING CRIME ON THE SCHOOL CAMPUS
THROUGH EDUCATION, POSITIVE INTERACTION AND ENFORCEMENT.
Resolution No. 3560 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE ALHAMBRA SCHOOL DISTRICT
FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF ONE POLICE OFFICER AT BARCELONA
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TO AID IN REDUCING CRIME ON THE SCHOOL CAMPUS
THROUGH EDUCATION, POSITIVE INTERACTION AND ENFORCEMENT.
10
1- 1-
.weJ6oJd uolloy
Allunwwo0 Jul to 6u!puni le!laed Jol luew1Jedaa sao!nJas uewnH /(luno0 edoouen Jul
yl!nn luawaai6e leluewuJano6Jalu! pue lesodoJd e lelllwgns Jul 6u!zuoylne uo!iniosaJ
}dope pue e!}!} eul puoAaq 6u!peaJ amen of seen uoRepuewwooai Jul
•£93`983$ of palunowe
aney siellop lljauaq loaJ!p asogl `Jeal( sit-ll amp of •swej6ojd snouen Joj spun]
ao!AJas loaJlp sep!noJd osle /(luno0 edooue j `spunk 6u!leJado NI uo!l!ppe ui
•luawaaJ6e eul
of luawpuawe ue jo IlounoO A1!0 eql 01 >loeq lLI6noJq aq pinonn 'Alpo Jegpe
Aq apew `lunowe loeJluoo Jul u! sa6uego luanbasgns Auy 'Z003 to loeJluoo
Jul anoidde Al!0 ail leul palsenbei ueaq seq 1! `sseoojd AJele6pnq s,i(luno0 edooueJ
et-11 to 6u!w!1 au} of ana •sesuedxa 6ulleiedo snoeueilaos!w pue `saolnJas lelpolsno
'sawn `coeds aoij}o Joi suollnquluoo pull-u! sap!noJd osle elepua10 jo Al!0 Jul
zi7L`Ez 1-$
to lunowe Jul u! pund lewauoo s,elepua10 g6noigl pap!noJd s! weJ6OJd uolloy
Apunwwo0 Jul JoJ 6u!punJ au} Jo uollpod y .Jean( leosll luennno s!ul woJJ. %£ Jo aseaJou!
ue si lunowe pesodoJd s!yl '01-9`651-$ Jo lunowe Jul u! weJ6OJd uolloy AllunwwoO
8I-11 JO uolleJado Jean( leos!4 6003-Z003 el-11 Jo} 6u!punJ le!IJed ep!noJd of loeJluoo
sp nnauaJ 01 pasodoid seq luawlJedea sao!AJas uewnH AlunoO edoouel/1l eul
.se p!sgns
luaJ Ajeiodwal pue aouels!sse sselawoq sapnlou! yolunn `sali!wel JoJ aouels!sse
Aoua6Jawa pue `eouels!sse uollezuagleann `sluawAed aouels!sse A6Jeue apnlou!
seovues •Jean( uoea sluep!sei alepua1O awoou! aleJapow pue mo! }o Jagwnu a6Jel
e of sleJJaJaJ pue seo!AJas }oaJlp sepinoJd wBJ6oJd uolloy AllunwwoO s‘alepu010
AINRRO0 VdO01}VW H11M lOya1NOO Wb'UIOO}Id NOLLOV AUINfWWOO '6
'1N31N301:I0JN3 ONV NOIIO1/a31NI 3A11ISOd `N011VOna3 HOf1O1H1 SfldINVO
1O0HOS 3H1 NO 3WI1:IO ONI3fla31:1 NI OId Ol 1O0HOS HOIH A311VA 1:1330
HOd 1:13OIdzO 3OIlOd 3NO dO 1N3INNOISSV 3H1 HOd 1OIa1SI0 1O0HOS
631HINf1 A311VA 1:1330 3H1 HuIM 1N3IN33HOV 1V1N3INNa3AOOH31NI
NV dO O1NI ONI1:131N3 3H1 ONII3 HI0 ONV DNIZIHOHlflV VNOZIHV `AINflOO
Vd03JHVIN `31VaN310 dO A11O 3H1 dO 11ONf1O3 3141 dO NOI1f11OS31:1
b 6u!aq l! 'Apo allll pue Jagwnu Aq peal sena sauas MON 399£ 'ON uollnlosabJ
1N3IN30HOdN3 ONV NOI1OVa31NI 3AIIISOd `NOI1VOf103 H9f1OHH1 SfldINVO
1O0HOS 3H1 NO 31A1IHO ONIOf1031:1 NI OIV 01 1O0HOS 31aaIW a30N311VHO
HOd 1:130IddO 3O110d 3NO dO 1N3WNOISSV 3H1 HOd IOI1:11S10 1O0HOS
AHV1N3W313 31VON31O 3H1 HUIM 1N3W33HOV 1V1N31NNa3A0Ja31N1
NV dO O1NI ON11131N3 3H1 ONI103HIO ONV ONIZIHOH1f1V VNOZIHV `AJNfOO
VdOOIHVIN `31VaN310 dO 1113 3H1 JO lIONfOO 3H1 dO NOI1f11OS31:1
d 6u!aq 1! 'Apo aim pue Jegwnu Aq peal seen sauas MON 1-99£ 'ON uollnlosald
Resolution No. 3563 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE
MARICOPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT CONCERNING THE CITY
OF GLENDALE'S COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM.
10. APPROVAL OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH ARIZONA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS AT 67TH AVENUE AND BETHANY HOME ROAD
This was a request for approval of an intergovernmental agreement with the
Arizona Department of Transportation to construct intersection safety improvements at
the intersection of 67th Avenue and Bethany Home Road. The intersection
improvements include a far-side bus bay and right turn lanes on all intersection legs;
raised medians on the north, south, east and west legs; and right turn lanes for
northbound, southbound and westbound traffic approaching the intersection.
Construction plans for this project are 75% complete and the right-of-way acquisition
needed for the project is underway. The design, right-of-way acquisition, and contract
bidding are estimated to be completed by January of 2003.
Adjacent businesses have all been contacted and are aware of the proposed
improvement. Another public meeting will be conducted prior to construction and the
adjacent businesses will again be notified.
Construction of these improvements will help alleviate traffic congestion at this
intersection and improve safety. The estimated project cost is $1 ,158,837. Part of the
construction cost is funded through a Federal Safety grant providing $791,105 in
Federal funds. The City's estimated matching share of the project construction cost is
$367,732. The funds are available from the City of Glendale Transportation
Intersection Safety Improvement Fund, Account Number 62-9443-8330.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign any and all documentation relating to
this request.
Resolution No. 3564 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFINING RESPONSIBILITIES FOR
THE ACQUISITION OF FEDERAL FUNDS TO PROVIDE INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS TO 67TH AVENUE AND BETHANY HOME ROAD.
12
11. APPROVAL OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS FOR THE
E
EDUCATION CIRCULATOR TRANSIT SERVICE
This was a request for City Council approval to renew intergovernmental
agreements between the City of Glendale and Arizona State University West (ASU
West); Maricopa County Community College District d.b.a. Glendale Community
College (GCC); and Thunderbird - The American Graduate School of International
Management (AGSIM). These agreements provide for a continuation of the Professor
GUS transit link between the schools and fixed route bus service to the general public
along 51st Avenue from Olive Avenue to Thunderbird Road until June 30, 2002.
Professor GUS has been in service since September of 2000, providing a
transportation alternative to students and the general public. During the original
discussions it was agreed that Professor GUS would operate as a pilot program for 18
months, and the viability of the service would be evaluated and a determination would
be made to continue or discontinue the service. After 18 months of service, daily
ridership averages about 57 passengers per day, which is low compared to other Valley
Metro routes. The schools, which provide one-third of the funding, have written letters to
the City advising that, due to funding reductions made by the State and the low
ridership, they will no longer be able to provide funding as a partner in this service. The
City's portion of the service was funded with LTAF II (Local Transportation Assistance)
funds from the State General Fund. LTAF II funding was eliminated by the legislature
to make up for the State's budget shortfall.
Under terms of the agreements, the City will continue to provide transit services
to the institutions until June 30, 2002. The total cost of providing the service through
Laidlaw Transit Services, will be $54,540. The City will pay 65% of this cost - $35,521,
ASU West and GCC will each pay 13% - $7,064, and AGSIM, will pay 9% - $4,891.
The City will retain the fare box revenue. Funding for this service is provided in the
Transit operating budget, Account Number 26-4234-7330.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign any and all documentation relating to
this request.
Resolution No. 3565 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS WITH ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
WEST AND GLENDALE COMMUNITY COLLEGE ALONG WITH A
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE AMERICAN GRADUATE
SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT FOR THE JOINT AND
COOPERATIVE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING TRANSIT SERVICES AKA THE
EDUCATION CIRCULATOR.
13
12. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR 51ST AVENUE AND BETHANY
HOME ROAD BURLINGTON NORTHERN & SANTA FE RAILWAY CROSSING
This was a request to approve an intergovernmental agreement between the
State of Arizona and the City of Glendale for the installation of a cantilever with flashers
at the 51st Avenue and Bethany Home Road, Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway
crossing.
The work is part of a Federal program to improve the safety at public rail-highway
crossings and is needed to improve the street safety at this crossing. The cost for
these improvements, $51 ,758.00, is funded at 100% by the Federal Highway
Administration. There is no cost to the City.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution that authorizes the City to enter into this agreement and authorizes the City
Manager to execute this agreement on behalf of the City.
Resolution No. 3566 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RAILWAY CROSSING AT 51ST
AVENUE AND BETHANY HOME ROAD, BURLINGTON NORTHERN & SANTE FE
RAILWAY.
13. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR PASADENA AVENUE AND
BURLINGTON NORTHERN & SANTA FE RAILWAY CROSSING
This was a request to approve an intergovernmental agreement between the
State of Arizona and the City of Glendale for the installation of a cantilever with flashers
at the Pasadena Avenue, Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway crossing.
The work is part of a Federal and State program to improve the safety at public
rail-highway crossings and is needed to improve the street safety at this crossing. The
cost for these improvements, $150,847, is funded at 94.3% by the Federal Highway
Administration and 5.7% by the State. There is no cost to the City.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution that authorizes the City to enter into this agreement and authorizes the City
Manager to execute this agreement on behalf of the City.
14
Resolution No. 3567 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RAILWAY CROSSING AT
PASADENA AVENUE AND BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTE FE RAILWAY.
14. ADMINISTRATIVE ENTERPRISES DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Administrative Enterprises proposes to purchase the 24,000 square foot
Comdisco facility at Talavi Business Park and relocate its Phoenix operations.
Administrative Enterprises is a third party administrator that provides staffing needs for
other businesses and organizations. They hire and train clerical personnel, customer
service representatives, claims processing analysts, eligibility clerks, client services
representatives, and information technology staff. They currently employ 60 people at
an average wage of $16.50/hour. They anticipate adding an additional 50 people over
the next five years.
The development agreement includes the following points:
• Glendale will rebate up to $2,000 of construction sales tax collected.
• Glendale will pay an Employment Development Incentive (EDI) not to exceed
$10,000 for new full-time positions(FTE) created during the first four years of
operation. The company will earn the Employment Development Incentive at
a rate of $135 per qualified FTE for all jobs net new to Glendale. This
includes the initial 60 that they will relocate and an additional 15 to be created
in the future. The average wage for all employees for which the EDI is
granted must not be less than $15 per hour.
• Administrative Enterprises will maintain operations in Glendale for at least ten
years.
• The City will seek a repayment mechanism if Administrative Enterprises
ceases operations prematurely.
This project will assist in the creation and retention of jobs and will improve and
enhance the economic welfare of the residents of the City of Glendale.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a development agreement with
Administrative Enterprises, Inc.
15
Resolution No. 3568 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF A
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH ADMINISTRATIVE ENTERPRISES, INC.; AND
DIRECTING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BE RECORDED.
15. REDEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARIES
The City adopted a redevelopment area in 1989 that includes the area between
63rd Avenue on the west, 51st Avenue on the east, Orangewood Avenue on the north,
and Maryland Avenue on the south; and the area between 51st Avenue on the west,
47th Avenue on the east, Glenn Drive on the north, and parcels on the south of
Glendale Avenue.
Downtown Glendale has historically been the center of the community and the
area along Glendale Avenue between 43rd Avenue and 67th Avenue is an important
economic asset to the City. The resolution to adopt an enhanced redevelopment area
will provide the mechanism to encourage coordinated public/private action and
reinvestment in this area by expanding the existing boundaries set in 1989. The
expanded area will be three square miles bounded by 43rd Avenue on the east, 67th
Avenue on the west, Orangewood Avenue on the north, and Maryland Avenue on the
south.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and approve a
resolution adopting the new redevelopment area boundaries.
Resolution No. 3569 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, ESTABLISHING A REDEVELOPMENT AREA FOR THE AREA
BOUNDED BY ORANGEWOOD AVENUE ON THE NORTH, MARYLAND AVENUE
ON THE SOUTH, 43RD AVENUE ON THE EAST, AND 67TH AVENUE ON THE WEST
AS PROVIDED IN A.R.S. §36-1473.
Mr. Leonard Clark, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District, stated
that he supported the Governor's Highway Safety Grant for underage drinking
enforcement. He noted, however, that he was concerned about the sobriety
checkpoints. He said the Community Action Program Grant with Maricopa County was
a good thing and it was his hope that homeless families will be assisted and placed in
housing faster. He asked if the intergovernmental agreements with the Arizona
Department of Transportation (ADOT) include underpasses or overpasses. He
expressed concern that the historical portion of the church behind the Glendale Civic
Center will be torn down to make way for additional parking. He told the City Council
that he would go to staff for the answers to these questions.
16
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Goulet, to approve the
recommended actions on Consent Resolution Item Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14 and 15, including the approval and adoption of Resolution No. 3556 New
Series, Resolution No. 3557 New Series, Resolution No. 3558 New Series,
Resolution No. 3559 New Series, Resolution No. 3560 New Series, Resolution No.
3561 New Series, Resolution No. 3562 New Series, Resolution No. 3563 New
Series, Resolution No. 3564 New Series, Resolution No. 3565 New Series,
Resolution No. 3566 New Series, Resolution No. 3567 New Series, Resolution No.
3568 New Series, and Resolution No. 3569 New Series. The motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
16. WESTERN AREA GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION NO.
G P-00-04
Ms. Kate Langford, Senior Planner, presented this item. The Western Area
General Plan Amendment, Application No. GP-00-04, has been discussed with the City
Council at workshops held on December 11, 2001, January 8, 2002, and January 15,
2002. The Western Area General Plan Update was initiated by the City Council in
December of 1999 after a series of workshops that began in 1997.
The purpose of the Western Area amendment is four fold: first, to update the
map of the area and accurately reflect the Agua Fria Freeway (Loop 101) alignment;
second, to reaffirm the City's commitment to retaining the majority of the area west of
the Loop 101 as the "employment reserve" for the City; third, to introduce four new land
use categories that reflect the development potential of the area now that the Loop 101
is completely functional; and four, to update and maximize the potential for siting parks
and open space areas prior to any further development in the area. The value of this
amendment is the opportunity to guide new development, both residential and non-
residential, in the Western Area with development guidelines that are included in the
amendment document.
The five community goals contained in the Western Area General Plan
Amendment will be reflected in the Glendale 2025 General Plan, along with the
Western Area Future Land Use Map. After adoption of the Glendale 2025 document,
and subsequent ratification by the voters, the specific development guidelines and
maps in the Western Area General Plan Amendment will function as a specific area
plan.
The major features of the proposed Western Area General Plan Amendment
are the continuation of the employment reserve, a regional activity center, strengthening
the area's image as the western "Gateway to Glendale", and the introduction of four
new land use designations.
17
The four new land use designations contained in the proposed amendment are
Neighborhood Shopping Center (NSC), Community Shopping Center (CSC), Corporate
Commerce Center (CCC), and Sports/Entertainment Mixed Use (SEMU). In 2001, the
City Council adopted new zoning districts that can be utilized to implement the NSC and
CSC land use designations. The CCC and SEMU land use designations may be
implemented with the Planned Area Development (PAD) zoning district. A new zoning
district may be needed to further accommodate the CCC designation.
Employment-generating land uses are the emphasis of the Western Area
amendment. Little change is proposed west of the Agua Fria Freeway (Loop 101).
This area is predominately designated as Business Park (BP) and Light Industrial (LI).
Changes between 115th Avenue and the Loop 101 include the addition of the
Western Area Water Reclamation Facility, adjusting the location of the commercial
opportunity at Glen Harbor Boulevard and Glendale Avenue, adjustment of the New
River corridor in accordance with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
correction of the alignments of 99th Avenue and Loop 101, and the adjustment of the
commercial opportunities at the intersection of 99th and Glendale Avenues.
The proposed general plan amendment characterizes the area east of the Loop
101 to 83rd Avenue as a mixture of employment, retail, entertainment and residential
development. The corridor from the east side of the Loop 101 to 91st Avenue is the
area of greatest change. Three of the new land use designations occur within this area
— Community Shopping Center, Corporate Commerce Center, and
Sports/Entertainment Mixed Use. The corridor between 83rd and 91st Avenues is
proposed as predominately residential, with some neighborhood commercial located at
the intersection of arterials. The overall residential density is slightly lower than that of
the existing General Plan. The new Neighborhood Shopping Center designation occurs
within this area.
The Corporate Commerce Center and the Sports/Entertainment Mixed-Use
designations include an opportunity for limited residential development. There are two
criteria for residential development that each of the designations contain. The first
criteria is that a minimum of 30% of the employment or retail use be established prior to
any residential development. The second criteria is that a maximum of only 15% of the
total acreage within a single area designated either Corporate Commerce Center or
Sports/Entertainment Mixed Use is permitted to be residential.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and approve the Western
Area General Plan Amendment, Application No. GP-00-04.
Councilmember Goulet asked if it was likely that the CCC and SEMU would be
implemented. Ms. Langford stated that all of the General Plan land use category
designations have an individual zoning designation that implements the land use
category. She said zoning categories that address the CCC and SEMU designations
do not currently exist. She explained that the mixture of uses or activities being
18
requested might necessitate the development of a new zoning designation. She
pointed out that the original Planned Area Development category was written with a
very strong residential base, whereas the new designations are more employment or
mixed-use related. Councilmember Goulet asked if the designations would be use
driven. Ms. Langford explained that it will depend on the types of requests received
and the end product desired by the City. She said they would perform an internal
review of the Plan annually and a complete review and re-adoption of the General Plan
every ten years.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 16.
Mr. Leonard Clark, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District,
commented on the hard work done by the Council and City staff on the Western Area
General Plan Amendment. He expressed concern that northern Glendale is becoming
higher income residential, while southern Glendale has low income residential. He said
he would like to see affordable apartments and other lower-income housing
opportunities in northern Glendale.
Mr. Tom Traw, a resident of the City of Glendale Yucca District, said the 88-
acre park and the Coyotes arena will be tremendous assets to the Western Area. He
noted that home values have increased 5% to 10% since the City's plans were
announced. He said a study conducted by the University of Southern California
concluded that green space could actually increase home values and assist in
revitalizing inner-city neighborhoods. A copy of an article entitled Space on Housing
Prices by Delores Conway, which appeared in a University of Southern California
publication, was presented to the Council. This article is included as a part of the
original packet of the meeting materials. He expressed his opinion that large residential
lots, not apartments, would better fit the needs of residents in west Glendale.
Mr. John Kolodziq, a resident of the City of Glendale Yucca District,
commented on petitions signed by Glendale residents asking (1) that any type of
apartment complex be located within the mass of the development and not on major
arterials, and (2) that some land south of the Grand Canal from 83rd to 91St Avenues be
reserved for larger residential lots. He acknowledged that Mr. Rick Flaaen, City
Attorney, had indicated in his letter that the General Plan should not dictate or restrict
the location of permitted uses within a zoning designation. He said adequate space for
larger lots is dwindling. He suggested that it would be appropriate to place larger lots
along the Grand Canal.
Mr. James J. Miller, a City of Phoenix attorney, spoke on behalf of Mr. John
F. Long. He expressed Mr. Long's surprise at the citizen petition. He stated that they
had only learned of it last week. He discussed Mr. Long's approach to zoning and
development. He explained that they first approached the City and the respective
Council person to determine what is envisioned for a particular area. He said they then
hold citizen meetings, independent of the City, to obtain their input. He stated citizens'
fears are usually assuaged once they understand how the different aspects of a
19
development relate. He said R1-6 already exists in the area and, therefore, they had to
do a transition development. He stated that they had already worked with the Flood
Control District to dedicate 22 acres for the flood control channel along the Bethany
Home alignment and the Pendergast School District to set aside 20 acres for a school
site. He said they felt the General Plan for the area was appropriate. He noted that Mr.
Long had donated 300 acres to the Glendale Airport in the early 1980's and 80 acres
for the waste water treatment plant in the late 1990's. He said they looked forward to
meeting with local citizens to discuss their development.
Mr. Richard Schwartz, a resident of the City of Glendale Yucca District,
submitted a public hearing speaker's card in opposition. He indicated that he did not
wish to speak.
Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Frate, to approve the Western
Area General Plan Amendment, Application No. GP-00-04.
Councilmember Clark stated that it has taken years and countless meetings to
develop the Western Area General Plan Amendment Update. She thanked Mr. Jon
Froke, Planning Director; Ms. Kate Langford, Senior Planner; and Mr. Ron Short, Long
Range Manager, for their patience and devotion to the project. She said the plan has
many positive aspects, in particular the five community goals. She said, in spite of its
positive aspects, she was unable to vote in favor of the plan because of two issues that
continue to be of concern to her constituents, namely apartment and low density
residential developments.
Councilmember Clark said the plan designates 975 acres as Corporate
Commerce Center or Sports Entertainment Mixed Use, 15% of which can be used for
housing. She stated that it was unrealistic to believe single-family housing would occur
within such intense development and, therefore, there could be 147 acres of multi-
family housing. She pointed out that a density of 16 dwelling units per acre would yield
2,352 apartment units and a density of 20 dwelling units per acre would yield 2,940
apartment units, all within two contiguous miles. She questioned the developer's
argument that the apartments are essential to the success of their commercial and
retail developments. She stated that the developments are expected to be destination
sites, drawing people from all over the West Valley. She stated that the estimates of
the Maricopa Association of Governments for the plan's trade area show a current
population of 138,000 people, increasing to nearly 200,000 by 2011 and 250,000 by
2020. She said that population level will make the SEMU and CCC developments
successful, not high-density housing placed within the projects. She stated that staff
research shows that there are 114 apartment complexes in the City, 39 in the Yucca
District alone. She said 2,000 to 3,000 additional apartment units within the Yucca
District was unwarranted and unneeded. Councilmember Clark stated that the citizen
petition issue of the location of the apartments had been partially resolved with regard
to the SEMU district. She explained that the Ellman Companies had decided to move
20
their proposed freestanding apartments away from 91St Avenue and behind garden
offices. She said, while she and the residents supported the proposed solution within
the SEMU zoning district, it does not resolve future possibilities within other portions of
the CCC zoning district.
Councilmember Clark expressed her opinion that there is not enough low density
residential zoning in west Glendale, especially along the 83rd Avenue corridor between
Grand Canal/Bethany Home Road. She said they lost a major opportunity to designate
large-lot development between 91st Avenue and the Loop 101 because of the Tolleson
and Pendergast School Districts' decisions to locate a high school and elementary
school in that area. She said the City's only other opportunity is south of Grand Avenue
and Bethany Home Road. She stated that the residents of west Glendale have
repeatedly voiced their concerns on both of these issues. They circulated a petition
asking the Council to consider two actions: (1) All multi-family to be developed in the
CCC and SEMU zoning districts is to be located within the mass of commercial, retail,
and office development or is to be located above the commercial, retail and office
complexes. There will be no freestanding multi-family complexes between residential
subdivisions and elements of the CCC and SEMU zoning districts; and (2) between 83rd
Avenue and 91st Avenue, south of the Grand Canal and Bethany Outfall Channel, a
minimum of 100 acres is to be reserved for equestrian large lot development, with a
portion of the 100 acres immediately south of the Bethany Outfall Channel to be
designated as 0 to 1 dwelling units per acre and the balance of the 100 acres south of
that specific designation to be identified as 1 to 2.5 dwelling units per acre. She denied
accusations that the issues were hers exclusively and that she led the residents of west
Glendale to adopt them.
Councilmember Clark noted that Mayor Scruggs requested a legal opinion on
whether the Western Area General Plan Amendment could be amended to include the
two components of the citizen petition. She refuted Mr. Flaaen's argument of
specificity. She stated that the citizens are only requesting that the apartments be
placed within the mass of the project, not at a specific location. With regard to the
citizen's request to reserve land for lower density development, she reminded that
Council that the R1-8 zoning is not vested and would not become vested until funds are
expended to develop the property. She stated that, based on Mr. Flaaen's finding that
the citizens could not request a zoning designation of less than one unit per acre, the
citizens have agreed to amend their request for 0 to 1 units per acre to 1 to 2.5 units
per acre.
Councilmember Clark said, personally, she would like to vote to approve the plan
tonight, formally requesting that the Council amend the plan to include (1) that all
housing be located within the mass of the CCC and SEMU zoning districts, and (2) that
land south of the Grand Canal/Bethany Outfall Channel be designated as 1 to 2.5 units
per acre.
21
Mr. Flaaen explained that the General Plan is intended to identify the general
distribution, location, and extent of land uses. He acknowledged that ARS 9-462 states
the City can regulate the location, height, bulk, number, story, size of buildings and
structures, and the intensity of land use. He said, while the citizens are not specifying
that multi-family be located in a certain area, they are specifying that it not be located in
a specific area. He stated the General Plan is not the appropriate place for such a
decision to be made and the Council cannot use the plan to make specific land use
designations. With regard to the citizen request that density be changed to 1 to 2.5
units per acre, Mr. Flaaen stated that the Council is free to consider such a change;
however, it is the Planning Department's position that the low density designation would
not be consistent with plans for the area or with good planning practice. He stated that
Mr. Long could bring suit against the City if the designation was to go below one unit
per acre.
Councilmember Martinez expressed his opinion that the General Plan meets the
community goals. He emphasized that the General Plan is not intended to be a specific
area plan that shows a development concept for each and every parcel within the study
area. He said, because 30% of the retail use has to be established prior to any
residential development and because a maximum of 15% of the acreage within a single
CCC or SEMU area is permitted to be residential, he could support the plan as
presented.
Councilmember Goulet expressed his opinion that Councilmember Clark's
rationale for opposing the plan was flawed. He noted that many of the signatories on
the petitions live several miles from the subject area. He said, while some multi-family
developments have problems, the quality of the development will be first rate, with
rental rates that far exceed the amount paid by many homeowners. He stated that it
would be unfair to say the development will be a source of crime. He noted that many
people choose to live in multi-family because of the flexibility such housing provides.
He expressed his opinion that opposing the development because it is multi-family
would be narrow minded and shortsighted as to the benefits the overall development
could bring to the community. He said he supported the plan as presented.
Mayor Scruggs noted that copies of Mr. Flaaen's opinion were available to those
who were interested. She said the key element of Mr. Flaaen's comments was that the
proper method to address restricting the location of multi-family developments within
CCC and SEMU areas is by changing zoning regulations or through the application
review process. She said, while the request may be valid, it would not be appropriate to
address it in the General Plan. She stated that Mr. Miller indicated that Mr. Long would
be willing to consider large-lot development in the future if that was the desire of
residents in the area, but he would prefer to keep the property's current zoning at this
time. She suggested that some people are under the misconception that changes to
the General Plan would have to be brought back to the voters. She summarized by
stating that Councilmember Clark's meeting with Mr. Ellman resolved the first citizen
issue and the landowner does not support the second citizen issue.
22
Councilmember Clark clarified that the 220 acre Ellman project is located in
SEMU and does not address multi-family development in 755 acres of CCC designated
areas.
Upon a call for the question, the motion carried by a vote of 5 to 1.
Councilmember Clark voted "nay".
17. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP-01-12 AND REZONING APPLICATION
Z-01-20: 8702 WEST GLENDALE AVENUE
Ms. Tracy Stevens, Senior Planner, presented this request by Coe and Van Loo
Consultants Inc. to amend the General Plan from Limited Office, Residential 3.5-5.0,
and Residential 5-8 to Residential 2.5-3.5 dwelling units per gross acre. The request will
also rezone from A-1 (Agriculture) to R1-7 PRD (Single Residence, Planned Residential
Development), R1-8 PRD, R1-10 PRD, SR-12 PRD, and SR-17 PRD on 294.1 acres
located between 83rd Avenue and 89th Avenue, Glendale Avenue and Northern Avenue.
The requested General Plan Amendment is appropriate for this site. It is
consistent with other land use designations within the project boundaries, is compatible
with the surrounding area, and is consistent with the City's long-term goals for this
area.
The proposed zoning districts are appropriate to implement the General Plan
and the proposed amendment. The development plan provides for a variation in lots
sizes, provides larger lots reflecting existing development to the north and east, and
provides a stable and consistent transition from the existing single-family developments
in the area.
On April 18, 2002, the Planning Commission recommended approval of General
Plan Amendment GP-01-12 and Rezoning Application Z-01-20, subject to twelve
stipulations. A representative from the Salt River Project (SRP) spoke at the public
hearing to voice concern of the proposed project locating in the vicinity of the existing
power plant located at the northeast corner of 75th and Northern Avenues.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and approve General Plan
Amendment GP-01-12 and Rezoning Application Z-01-20, with Rezoning Application
Z-01-20 being subject to the stipulations recommended by the Planning Commission.
Mayor Scruggs asked Ms. Stevens to explain the issue of the generating plant.
She noted that she had received a letter from the Chairman of the Arizona Corporation
Commission warning against making such a large change. She said Mr. David Maguire
of Land Solutions, Inc. responded on behalf of the applicant that the change would be
minimal. He noted that only five acres would be effected. Ms. Stevens agreed that it
would be a minimal change. She explained that the existing Limited Office area is the
only area proposed to be changed. She said the remaining areas are already
designated residential and would not change, except in terms of density. She noted
23
that a stipulation had been included in the staff report, requiring the applicant to notify
proposed buyers of the plant's location and a statement would be placed on the final
plat and in the CC&Rs (Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions). Mayor Scruggs asked
if potential buyers would be made aware of the plant when touring the model homes.
Ms. Stevens said, although the stipulation was not detailed to that extent, the Council
could add such a requirement. Mayor Scruggs said they had found notification during
the early stages of the home buying process to be helpful when dealing with properties
in close proximity to Luke Air Force Base.
Councilmember Clark asked if Salt River Project (SRP) had required notification
by the Orangewood Estates subdivision. She pointed out that it has a much higher
density and is also located approximately one mile from the plant. Ms. Stevens said
SRP did not prepare a disclosure statement for the final plat of that subdivision.
Councilmember Frate agreed that proposed buyers should be made aware of
the plant's location because, regardless of whether or not the plant expands in the
future, residents will have to live with the plant's noises and vibrations. He said SRP
was trying to protect potential buyers.
Mr. David Maguire of Land Solutions, Inc., located in the City of Phoenix,
the applicant, thanked the Planning Commission for recognizing a great project and
forwarding their unanimous recommendation for approval. He said they had reviewed
and agreed to the stipulations. He said their upscale master plan represents a
milestone for western Glendale. He noted that it had a well thought-out circulation
system and consistent entry monumentation, walls, and landscape themes. He said
the separated sidewalks would allow them an opportunity to plant street trees, creating
a unique environment in each neighborhood. He stated that the five different zoning
categories being requested would provide a wide diversity of lot sizes and buyer choice.
He noted that the proposed density levels are well below the maximum General Plan
guidelines. He said they would be happy to disclose the existence of the plant to
potential homebuyers and had agreed to a stipulation written and approved by SRP.
He assured the Council that the information would be provided in several formats,
including the public report, a disclosure statement seen at the time of sale and in the
sales office.
Councilmember Goulet asked Mr. Maguire about phasing and what he projected
the build-out of the project to be. He also asked, at what point would the park be
developed. Mr. Maguire said they anticipated building the project in one phase,
beginning construction upon final plat approval. He said they hoped to have the park
and other major improvements completed and sales starting in late-2003 or early 2004.
Councilmember Frate asked if all of the communities would have a homeowners
association. Mr. Maguire explained THAT there would be one master homeowners
association, with each individual gated community having its own sub-association.
24
Mr. Maguire confirmed for Mayor Scruggs that the gated communities would own
their own streets.
Councilmember Martinez asked what form of notification of the SRP plant would
be available at the sales office. Mr. Maguire said the notice would be in the form of a
disclosure list presented to homebuyers. He stated that the disclosure statement is
typically one page in length. He said, while the disclosure statement would be given to
homebuyers for their review, sales personnel most likely would not read through the list
with the homebuyer. Councilmember Martinez expressed concern about prior
situations where disclosure of a particular land use was included in a list of 50 other
items, making it less prominent to the homebuyer. Mr. Maguire offered to consider any
suggestions the Council might have in terms of the disclosure. He stated that it was in
everyone's best interest to ensure that full disclosure of all information is made.
Mayor Scruggs suggested that the applicant produce a map indicating the
locations of the SRP generating plant, landfill, Glendale Airport, Glendale Wastewater
Treatment Plant, Coyotes arena and so forth. Mr. Maguire said he supported Mayor
Scruggs' suggestion.
Councilmember Clark noted that she had asked for this type of notification years
ago, but met resistance by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, the Realtor's
Association, and the State Real Estate Department. She said people have a right to
know what developments exist or are planned for the area in which they are considering
buying a home.
Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Maguire if he would develop a map. Mr. Maguire
pointed out that they are not the homebuilders on the project. He said, however,
whatever reputable homebuilder they choose to bring into the project will be as
concerned about full disclosure as the Council. He said he would agree to a stipulation
by the Council that such a document be created.
Vice Mayor Eggleston agreed that a map would help avoid problems in the
future. Mr. Maguire noted that he spoke with Ms. Kathie Lee, a representative of SRP,
and the Chairman of the Corporation Commission. He said he believed their main
intent was to make people aware of the plant's existence. He stated they would do their
best to make sure full disclosure is made.
Councilmember Clark said Ms. Lee also indicated to her that she was
comfortable with the compromise crafted by the applicant. She noted that SRP has far
greater concerns with development occurring in the City of Peoria.
Councilmember Goulet said it is people's nature to skim over the disclosure
statements, regardless of its format. He commended Mr. Maguire for his willingness to
work with SRP.
25
Mr. Kelly House of Fortis Realty Investments spoke on behalf of the applicant.
He offered to provide a large aerial map in the sales office that discloses neighboring
facilities within a one-mile area. Mayor Scruggs agreed that a visual in the office would
probably work better than handing homebuyers another document to read.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 17.
Ms. Kathie Lee, a representative of Salt River Project, suggested that the
Council leave an adequate buffer between the Agua Fria Generating Plant and future
residential developments. She said SRP operates the plant one mile from the area
under consideration for rezoning to residential use. She stated that SRP was
comfortable that all of its plants are clean and safe; however, demands of Valley growth
have required the expansion of two plants. She said both expansions met with strong
opposition from citizens living up to one mile away from the plants. She noted that
criticism was also directed at the local municipalities for allowing zoning changes that
permitted residential uses in proximity to the existing power plants. She said, while
SRP has no current expansion plans for the Agua Fria plant, placing residences in
close proximity to the plant would complicate SRP's ability to expand should it become
necessary in the future. She noted that the normal noises, vibrations, steam releases
and odors associated with the existing plant may cause discomfort for some citizens.
She stated that, to alleviate the concern, SRP requested that the City leave an
adequate agricultural or commercial buffer around the Agua Fria facility. She said if the
Council decided to amend the General Plan and rezone to allow residential
development in that area, SRP would ask that the developer be required to provide
written notice to all potential buyers warning of the plant's existence, its existing noises,
vibrations, steam releases and odors, and that the plant may some day be expanded.
She stated that the Planning Department, the Planning Commission, and the developer,
through Mr. Maguire, had approved the disclosure and the language suggested by
SRP. She noted that an SRP contact phone number had been included in the
disclosure.
With regard to two other developments in even closer proximity to the plant, Ms.
Lee explained that SRP was not made aware of them in a timely manner and was
unable to express their concerns to Council. She said they were contacting the builders
of the homes and requesting that they provide disclosure to potential buyers. She
asked that the City to lend its support to their efforts, if necessary. She noted that they
also had an appointment to meet with Maricopa County concerning County land located
in proximity to the plant.
Mr. Leonard Clark, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District, said he
was happy that the City was taking measures to ensure that the developer notifies
potential homebuyers of the plant's existence. He stated that he could sometimes
smell petroleum from his home, which is located on 59th Avenue between Northern and
Olive Avenues. He suggested that people who live in the area perform their own tests
to see what fumes or gases might be in the air and that they check with the EPA
(Environmental Protection Agency) to see if there are any violations on record. He
26
expressed his opinion that sales people should verbally inform potential homebuyers of
the plant's existence. He said he was also concerned that nine of the communities will
be gated. He asked if the park would be a public park, since the City will be using the
public's tax dollars to maintain it. He stated that it was his understanding that every
development of a certain size must have a homeowner's association. He said he would
check with staff regarding the park.
Mr. Larry Rovev, a resident of the City of Glendale Yucca District, noted that
he serves on the Board of Directors of SRP. He thanked Ms. Lee for her diligence on
this issue. He said he has lived within a quarter-mile of the plant most of his life and
was acutely aware of the noises, vibrations, and odors that it emits. He pointed out that
his residence would be one of the closest to the plant and he was unable to see or hear
the plant from his home. He noted, however, that he was able to hear both airplanes
and freeway traffic. He said his family is proud that their land will be part of the
development.
Mr. Ron Prothero, a resident of the City of Glendale Ocotillo District,
submitted a public hearing speaker's card in opposition. He stated that he did not wish
to speak.
Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Eggleston, to approve General
Plan Amendment GP-01-12 and Rezoning Application Z-01-20, with Rezoning
Application Z-01-20 being subject to the stipulations recommended by the
Planning Commission and adding a stipulation requiring the developer to post a
visual map disclosing the location of facilities located within one mile of the
subdivision.
Councilmember Clark stated that Mr. Maguire has been extremely sensitive to
her concerns. She said she hoped this would be the first of many upscale projects in
the City of Glendale.
Mayor Scruggs expressed her opinion that it is a unique and outstanding
development. She asked that the Airport be included on the map, even if it is located
more than one mile from the subdivision.
Upon a call for the question, the motion carried unanimously.
18. REZONING APPLICATION Z-01-18: 8490 WEST CAMELBACK ROAD
Ms. Tracy Stevens, Senior Planner, presented this request by Darin Sender of
Sender Associates, Chartered, to rezone from A-1 (Agricultural) to SR-17 (Suburban
Residence) on 5.0 acres located west of the northwest corner of Camelback Road and
83rd Avenue.
27
The proposed SR-17 zoning is consistent with the General Plan designation of 1-
2.5 dwelling units per acre. SR-17 is an appropriate zoning district for this site. With an
R1-8 (Single Residence) subdivision to the west and SR-17 zoning districts to the north
and east, the character of the area is larger lot suburban residence and not agricultural.
The uses in the proposed district are compatible with the surrounding area. The
property owner intends to apply for a Conditional Use Permit in order to develop the site
for a church worship center.
On March 21, 2002, the Planning Commission recommended approval of
Rezoning Application Z-01-18, subject to two stipulations. No one, except the
applicant, spoke at the Planning Commission public hearing.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and approve Rezoning
Application Z-01-18, subject to the stipulations recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 18. As there
were no comments, Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
Ms. Darin Sender, the applicant, explained that the First Bible Baptist Church
intends to construct a church center on the property. She said they had worked with
City staff to come up with zoning for the area that is compatible with adjacent zoning
and the General Plan designation for the area. She said the project will also create a
valuable buffer between the residential and commercial developments.
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Frate, to approve Rezoning
Application Z-01-18, subject to the stipulations recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Councilmember Clark said she had been involved with this project since the
beginning and she believed it will be a nice addition to the community.
Upon a call for the question, the motion carried unanimously.
LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTION
19. CITY CENTER MASTER PLAN — REQUEST TO TABLE
The Council initiated the City Center Master Plan (CCMP) project as a policy
goal in 2000. The City Council directed that the City update its downtown master plan
adopted in 1994 as a component of the City's General Plan. Per State statutory
requirements, the General Plan must be updated every five years. The CCMP is a
specific area plan that is long-range in nature, which will be incorporated into the
General Plan Update.
28
The combined input of months of work by City staff, contracted consultants, and
the Citizens Advisory Committee, has resulted in the development of a revitalization
document called the City Center Master Plan. The City Center Master Plan document
outlines a revitalization strategy for the study area. The City Center Master Plan, when
adopted, will function as a policy document and provide guidelines for the revitalization
of the study area.
The public hearing for the City Center Master Plan was publicized for this
evening and the property owners were notified. Due to the complexity of the City
Center Master Plan, Economic Development Department staff recommended that this
item be discussed at a City Council Workshop to be held in July of 2002 so that the City
Council could review the Planning Commission's recommendations and finalize the City
Center Master Plan prior to adoption.
The recommendation was to table the City Center Master Plan until the July 23,
2002 City Council meeting.
Mr. Beasley asked the Council to table this item until the July 23, 2002 Council
meeting. He noted that it will also be brought before the Council at a Workshop to be
held in July of 2002.
It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Clark, to table the City Center
Master Plan until the July 23, 2002 City Council meeting. The motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - LIQUOR LICENSES
20. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-819 KANEYA SUSHI EXPRESS
This was a request for a new series 12 (restaurant) license for Kaneya Sushi
Express, which is located at 6334 West Bell Road. The approval of this license will
increase the total number of liquor licenses in this area by one.
The establishment is over 300 feet from any school or church. No protests were
filed during the 20-day posting period. The Planning Department, the Police
Department and the County Health Department have reviewed the application and
determined that it meets all technical requirements.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward the
application to the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, with the
recommendation for approval.
21. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-820 BILL JOHNSON'S BIG APPLE RESTAURANT
This was a request for a new series 12 (restaurant) license for Bill Johnson's Big
Apple Restaurant, which is located at 7322 West Bell Road. The previous owner
29
operated this business as the Black-Eyed Pea and held a series 12 (restaurant) license
at this location. A new license is required because a series 12 license is not
transferable.
The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim
permit issued by the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control. The
approval of this license will not increase the total number of liquor licenses in this area.
The establishment is over 300 feet from any school or church. No protests were
filed during the 20-day posting period. The Planning Department, the Police
Department and the County Health Department have reviewed the application and
determined that it meets all technical requirements.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward the
application to the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, with the
recommendation for approval.
22. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-821 PORTOFINO RISTORANTE
This was a request for a new series 12 (restaurant) license for Portofino
Ristorante, which is located at 6020 West Bell Road, Suite E14. The previous owner
operated this business as Portofino Ristorante and held a series 12 (restaurant) license
at this location. A new license is required because a series 12 license is not
transferable.
The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim
permit issued by the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control. The
approval of this license will not increase the total number of liquor licenses in this area.
The establishment is over 300 feet from any school or church. No protests were
filed during the 20-day posting period. The Planning Department, the Police
Department and the County Health Department have reviewed the application and
determined that it meets all technical requirements.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward the
application to the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, with the
recommendation for approval.
23. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 8-222 COUNTRY MARKET IV
This was a request for a new series 10 (off-sale retail, beer & wine) license for
Country Market IV, which is located at 6108 West Northern Avenue. There have been
no prior liquor licenses at this location. Country Market IV currently has its business
location at 5957 West Northern Avenue.
30
Country Market IV located at 5957 West Northern Avenue will close this location
once the location at 6108 West Northern is open. The approval of this license will not
increase the number of licenses in the area because the series 10 at 5957 West
Northern Avenue will be surrendered.
Construction of the establishment has not yet occurred. Staff reviewed the
building plans submitted with the application and determined that the establishment is
over 300 feet from any school and/or church.
No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period. The Planning
Department, the Police Department, and the County Health Department have reviewed
the application and determined that it meets all technical requirements. The applicant
has obtained a conditional use permit for the convenience store and gas station use.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward the
application to the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, with the
recommendation for approval.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item Nos. 20, 21, 22,
and 23.
Mr. Leonard Clark, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District, spoke
with regard to the Country Market IV license. He noted that this establishment already
has a liquor license. He expressed concern about the blood donation center located in
the area. He asked how many times the police had been called to that market.
Ms. Angela Artymonow of Portofino Ristorante, the applicant, submitted a
public hearing speaker's card indicating that she was available to respond to any
questions the Council might have. Ms. Artymonow did not speak.
Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Clark, to forward Liquor License
Applications No. 3-819 for Kaneya Sushi Express, No, 3-820 for Bill Johnson's Big
Apple Restaurant, No. 3-821 for Portofino Ristorante, and No. 3-822 for Country
Market IV, to the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control,
with the recommendation for approval.
Vice Mayor Eggleston noted that Country Market IV has had four calls for police
service in five years.
Upon a call for the question, the motion carried unanimously.
31
PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE
24. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT Z-02-01 OFFICE SIGNAGE
Mr. Jacobs, Zoning Administrator, presented this request by Andrew E. Moore of
Earl, Curley & Lagarde on behalf of Victoria Properties to amend the Zoning Ordinance
to revise signage standards for office developments meeting certain site and building
size thresholds.
The proposed amendment would apply to larger C-0 (Commercial Office) and G-
O (General Office) sites. The site would require 330 feet of continuous arterial street
frontage and the office building would be a minimum of 10,000 square feet in size. The
amendment would increase the wall signage area from 24 square feet per building to
100 square feet per building. The freestanding identification sign would increase in
height from five feet to eight feet and maximum sign area from 36 square feet to 48
square feet. The amendment reflects the applicant's desire to provide additional tenant
identification for larger office buildings. The wall signage permitted is per building with
no relationship between number and size of tenants. This allows the office developer
flexibility to best meet the needs of the office tenants. The quality of signage, including
materials, colors and location, is evaluated in the design review process.
On April 18, 2002, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Zoning
Ordinance Text Amendment Z-02-01. One citizen spoke in favor of the request at the
Planning Commission public hearing.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing, approve Zoning
Ordinance Text Amendment Z-02-01, waive reading beyond the title, and adopt an
ordinance amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance.
Ordinance No. 2254 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
GLENDALE, ARIZONA, ARTICLE 7 (GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS) BY
AMENDING SECTION 7.104 RELATING TO PERMITTED PERMANENT SIGNS IN
OFFICE DISTRICTS; AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Councilmember Clark asked if it would have any impact on the CCC and SEMU
zoning districts. Mr. Jacobs responded that it would not. He explained that CCC and
SEMU are General Plan categories that would be implemented through a PAD zoning
case unless a zoning district is established.
Mr. Andrew Moore, with the law firm of Earl Curley & Lagarde, P.C., spoke on
behalf of the applicant, Victoria Properties. He said he saw this as the proper evolution
of the sign code for this district. He emphasized that developments would only be able
to take advantage of the slightly larger scale signs if it they had buildings larger than
10,000 square feet and there was 330 continuous feet of arterial frontage.
32
Councilmember Martinez expressed his opinion that it will be a great
improvement. He said it would allow businesses in the area to get the signage they
need. He noted that two smaller businesses had contacted him, expressing concerns
about their signage. Mr. Moore said the size of individual tenant signs would be up to
the property owner. Councilmember Martinez stated that he liked the fact that offices
facing residential areas would not be allowed to have signs. He said he supported the
request.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 24. As no
comments were made, Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Clark, to approve Ordinance
No. 2254 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
members voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and Scruggs.
Members voting "nay": none.
ORDINANCES
25. DEEDS AND EASEMENTS ORDINANCE
Mr. Ed Beasley, City Manager, presented this item. The City of Glendale is
conveyed real estate properties by quit-claim deed, warranty deed and/or easements
from property owners no longer desiring to retain ownership of their properties. Staff
allows these properties to accumulate and presents them to Council for a one-motion
consideration.
These properties have been used for sidewalks, streets, alleyways, parks, water
and sewer lines, and other public utilities. In order to utilize these properties for similar
use in the future, it is necessary that that Council adopt an ordinance dedicating these
properties for public use.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond title and adopt an ordinance
dedicating certain real property for public use.
Ordinance No. 2255 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, ACCEPTING DEEDS AND EASEMENTS FOR STREET,
PUBLIC UTILITY, SIDEWALK, ALLEY, WATER AND SEWER, PARKS AND OTHER
PURPOSES; ORDERING THE DOCUMENTS RECORDED; AND DEDICATING TO
PUBLIC USE THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED THEREIN.
It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Clark, to approve Ordinance No.
2255 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following members
voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and Scruggs. Members
voting "nay": none.
33
26. ABANDONMENT OF AN EASEMENT AT 59TH AVENUE, NORTH OFBELL
ROAD
Mr. Larry Broyles, City Engineer, presented this request to abandon an existing
one-foot non-vehicular access easement located at 17606 North 59th Avenue. The
purpose of this easement is to prohibit vehicular access upon or across this one-foot
area. This type of easement is generally used in residential areas to restrict the use of
a gate that would allow vehicular access onto a major arterial. This property was
originally a residential lot and has recently been rezoned to accommodate a proposed
dental office facility.
The owner has requested this abandonment due to the construction of the new
dental facility, which is currently in the approval stage. This abandonment is necessary
to allow construction of a driveway for ingress and egress to this property. No
objections to the abandonment have been received by any department within the City
of Glendale and there are no facilities located within this area.
There are no costs associated with this abandonment.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance abandoning this easement.
Ordinance No. 2256 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING THE ABANDONMENT OF A CURRENT ONE-
FOOT NON-VEHICULAR ACCESS EASEMENT LOCATED AT 59TH AVENUE NORTH
OF BELL ROAD TO THE OWNERS OF RECORD OF THE ABUTTING PROPERTY;
AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS
ORDINANCE.
It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Frate, to approve Ordinance
No. 2256 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
members voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and Scruggs.
Members voting "nay": none.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
27. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Appointments are to be made to the following boards or commissions that have
a vacancy or expired term.
34
Effective Term
Date Expires
Board of Adjustment
Ward, Douglas C. (Chair) Appointment 06/30/2002 06/29/2003
Dietzman, Carl (Vice-Chair) Appointment 06/30/2002 06/29/2003
Building Safety Advisory and Appeals Board
Torres, Michael (Vice-Chair) Re-appointment 06/26/2002 06/25/2003
Citizens Advisory Commission on Neighborhoods
Bernsten, Jerry (Chair) Re-appointment 06/30/2002 06/29/2003
Lugo, Louis (At-Large) Re-appointment 06/30/2002 06/29/2004
(Sahuaro)
Lugo, Louis (Vice-Chair) Appointment 06/30/2002 06/29/2003
Commission on Persons with Disabilities
Loya, Vickie (Mayoral) Appointment 05/14/2002 02/26/2004
(Cholla)
Housing Advisory Commission
Vacca, Rita (At-Large) Re-appointment 07/01/2002 06/30/2004
(Barrel)
Vacca, Rita (Vice-chair) Appointment 05/14/2002 05/13/2003
Tennyson, Michelle (At-Large) Appointment 05/14/2002 07/01/2003
(Cholla)
Library Advisory Board
Crowell, Nelda (Cactus) Appointment 05/14/2002 04/12/2004
Villalobos, Gibran (At-Large) Re-appointment 05/14/2002 05/07/2003
(Ocotillo)
35
Risk Management Worker's Compensation Trust Fund Board
Goulet, David (At-Large) Re-appointment 07/24/2002 07/23/2005
(Ocotillo)
Goulet, David (Chair) Re-appointment 07/24/2002 07/23/2003
Knafels, Donald (At-Large) Re-appointment 07/24/2002 07/23/2005
(Barrel)
Lynch, Arthur Re-appointment 07/24/2002 07/23/2005
The recommendation was to make appointments to the various Boards and
Commissions.
Councilmember Goulet recused himself from this item due to a conflict of
interest.
It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Eggleston, to appoint the
applicants listed above, for the terms listed above, to the Board of Adjustment,
the Building Safety Advisory and Appeals Board, the Citizens Advisory
Commission on Neighborhoods, the Commission on Persons with Disabilities;
the Housing Advisory Commission, the Library Advisory Board, and the Risk
Management Worker's Compensation Trust Fund Board. The motion carried
unanimously. Councilmember Goulet abstained.
REQUEST FOR FUTURE WORKSHOP AND EXECUTIVE SESSION
It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Frate, to vacate the Regular
City Council Workshop scheduled for Tuesday, May 21, 2002. The motion carried
unanimously.
REQUEST TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER LIEBERMAN
It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Frate, to excuse
Councilmember Lieberman from tonight's meeting. The motion carried
unanimously.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Mr. Leonard Clark, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District, said he
felt the quality of life in the City of Glendale was high. He complimented the Council on
being very conscientious. He stated his hope that a land owner would be willing to
donate the land for a park in his area.
36
COUNCIL COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Councilmember Clark wished Councilmember Lieberman well. She stated that
this is National Police week. She noted that her son and daughter were in Washington
D.C. attending the President's recognition of police officers who have died during the
past year. 'She reported that over 440 police officers died last year in the line of duty,
more than 70 as a result of the September 11 terrorist attacks. She said the State
ceremony honoring fallen officers was held last Monday at Wesley Bolin Plaza and
Glendale's ceremony would be held at 8:30 on Wednesday morning at the City of
Glendale amphitheater. She encouraged everyone to attend and pay their respect to
the officers who have given their life in the line of duty.
Councilmember Goulet acknowledged Mr. Mark Burdick, Acting Fire Chief, Fire
Department staff, and others for delivering water safety information to homes in the
community. He invited residents of his district to attend meetings on May 20th and 2nd
to discuss use permits at Northern Crossing.
Vice Mayor Eggleston announced that the Salvation Army located at 61St and
Northern Avenues will dedicate its new sanctuary on Sunday, May 19th
Councilmember Martinez wished Councilmember Lieberman a speedy recovery.
He said the skateboard park in his district was coming along nicely. He noted however,
that $8,000 in damage was done to one of the pyramids. He urged the skateboarders
not to use the facility until it has been completed.
Councilmember Frate welcomed Mr. George Nutwell, General Manager of
Bechtel's Global Business Services and the 435 employees he brought to the Sahuaro
District. He noted that Bechtel is working on over 1,000 projects in 70 countries
throughout the world. He reminded everyone to attend the City Safe Program to be
held at Fire Station No. 153 this Saturday, May 18th, at 8:00 a.m.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
�sGr_ /
Pamela e ' -- ra - _ _ -
37