HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 5/13/2003 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA,
HELD TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2003, 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.
Absent: Councilmember H. Philip Lieberman
Also present were Ed Beasley, City Manager; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City Manager;
Rick Flaaen, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City Clerk.
COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE VII, SECTION 6(c) OF THE GLENDALE CHARTER
A statement was filed by the City Clerk that the 3 resolutions and 4 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 22, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to dispense with the
reading of the minutes of the April 22, 2003 Regular City Council meeting, as each
member of the Council had been provided copies in advance, and approve them
as written. The motion carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mr. Ed Beasley, City Manager, read Agenda Item Number 1 and Ms. Pamela
Hanna, City Clerk, read Consent Agenda Resolutions Numbers 2 through 4 by number
and title.
1. SAFETY MODIFICATIONS FOR MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY
This is a request for City Council approval of contracts to design, manufacture and
install safety equipment at the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) to protect employees
from potential falls. The modifications are necessary to enhance worker safety and
assure compliance with U.S. Office of Safety & Health Administration (OSHA)
regulations.
The MRF began operation in July, 2000. The facility was designed to provide
maximum processing efficiency and meet all operating safety standards. HDR
Engineering, Inc. (HDR) was the designer of the facility structure. CP Manufacturing,
Inc. (CP) was responsible for the design, manufacture and installation of the facility
equipment.
1
Existing safety equipment at the MRF was primarily designed to protect line
operators during routine operations. As staff gained experience with the operation of
the MRF, it became evident that maintenance staff was not consistently provided with
the same level of fall protection as operational staff. To address this internal concern,
staff worked with the original designers of the facility and the Risk Management staff to
develop a plan to retrofit the MRF with additional safety equipment in maintenance
access areas. An interim plan was also implemented to provide additional fall
protection and harness training to key staff, and make minor facility modifications to
better control access to maintenance areas.
The recommended plan is to install additional safety equipment to allow staff to
more safely access equipment. The safety equipment to be installed will include
harness tie-off points, hand rails, steps and platforms for conveyor belt maintenance
and other primary areas of the facility that staff may need to access for maintenance
and repairs. The additions were identified as a first and primary level of protection for
the maintenance staff.
The plan is to be implemented through contracts with HDR and CP to provide the
design, manufacturing and installation of the added equipment. Both companies are
sole source providers for the project as a result of their original involvement with the
design and construction of the MRF. HDR will be responsible for designing and
locating the harness tie-off points to the existing MRF building. CP will be responsible
for the fall protection design and retrofitting of their patented equipment. A stamped
engineer's report will be issued at the end of the project to certify the modifications are
OSHA compliant.
The contract with HDR for structure design and project oversight is in the amount
of $9,488. The contract with CP for safety equipment design, manufacture, freight and
installation is in the amount of $90,520. Funding is available in the FY 03-04 MRF
operating budget, accounts 55-6275-7300 and 55-6275-8400, respectively.
The recommendation was to approve the safety equipment contracts with HDR
Engineering, Inc. and CP Manufacturing, Inc. in the amounts of $9,488, and $90,520,
respectively.
CONSENT RESOLUTIONS
2. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH MARICOPA COUNTY FOR
COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM FUNDING
This is a request for City Council approval for an intergovernmental agreement
(IGA) with Maricopa County Human Services Department to provide partial funding in
the amount of $159,610 for the FY 2003-04 operation of Glendale's Community Action
Program (CAP). CAP provides direct services and referrals to a large number of low
and moderate-income Glendale residents each year. Services include energy
2
assistance payments, weatherization assistance; emergency assistance for families,
which includes homeless assistance and temporary, rent subsidies.
The City of Glendale's General Fund supplements the remainder of CAP's budget
with an appropriation in the amount of $201,717. Glendale also provides in-kind
contributions for office space, utilities, custodial services and miscellaneous operating
expenses.
Due to the timing of the county budgetary process, it has been requested that the
city approve the IGA in May. Any subsequent changes in the IGA amount, made by
either entity, would be brought back to the City Council in the form of an amendment to
the agreement.
In addition to the operating funds, Maricopa County also provides direct service
funds for various programs. To date this year, those direct benefit dollars have
amounted to $391,106,
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution
authorizing the entering into of an intergovernmental agreement with the Maricopa
County Human Services Department for partial funding of the Community Action
Program.
Resolution No. 3667 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. 2 TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE
MARICOPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT CONCERNING THE CITY
OF GLENDALE'S COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM
3. VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT (VOCA) GRANT FOR CONTINUATION OF THE
VICTIMS' SERVICES PROGRAM
This is a request for City Council authorization to accept a $93,760 grant from the
Arizona Department of Public Safety. The grant funds have been awarded to the
Glendale Police Department to continue services to the victims of crime.
The funding will be utilized to support two Victim Assistance Caseworker positions,
to provide funding for part-time weekend court information clerks, and for the training of
staff. There are no new costs to the City of Glendale associated with accepting this
funding. The required match will be met using previously approved budgeted funds in
the police budget for FY 2003-2004. This funding cannot be used to supplant other
governmental funds that would otherwise be available to provide victim services.
Service provided to victims by virtue of this grant would include direct emotional
support and crisis counseling at crime scenes, referral and coordination of community
social services, and assistance with court-related issues on weekends and holidays.
3
Staff supported by this grant will continue to promote the West Valley Advocacy Center
as a place of hope and aid to victims of crime.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution
authorizing the City Manager to accept the grant award of $93,760 from the Arizona
Department of Public Safety.
Resolution No. 3668 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, ACCEPTING THE GRANT OFFER AND AUTHORIZING THE
EXECUTION OF ANY AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO THE DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE THROUGH THE VICTIMS OF CRIME ACT (VOCA) AND THE ARIZONA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
4. APPROVAL OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE ARIZONA
TOURISM AND SPORTS AUTHORITY AND B&B HOLDINGS, INC.
This is a request for council approval of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
with the Arizona Tourism and Sports Authority (TSA) and B&B Holdings Inc., (d.b.a.
Arizona Cardinals). Pursuant to the original Development, Disposition and
Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and the TSA approved by the council
on September 3, 2001 (DDA), the City may use the TSA's general contractor for the
construction of those portions of the City's development in connection with the stadium
(i.e. the parking area and infrastructure). The intent of this DDA provision was to
integrate construction of the parking facilities with the construction of the stadium
facilities, take advantage of the financial and other terms of the agreement between the
TSA and its general contractor, avoid overlapping areas of construction responsibility
between the City and the TSA and thus eliminate potential exposure for claims arising
from conflicts between contractors, and to facilitate the prompt completion of the City's
portion of the improvements. This MOU begins the process for the City to exercise that
authority. The final step will be for the City to enter into a formal IGA with the TSA
which will set out in detail the respective party's rights and obligations.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution
authorizing the approval of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Arizona
Tourism and Sports Authority and B&B Holdings, Inc.
Resolution No. 3669 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 EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE ARIZONA
TOURISM AND SPORTS AUTHORITY AND B&B HOLDINGS, INC., DBA ARIZONA
CARDINALS, SETTING FORTH THE PARTIES RESPECTIVE RIGHTS AND
OBLIGATIONS REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MULTI-PURPOSE
FACILITY AND RELATED PARKING
4
It was moved by Clark and seconded by Frate, to approve the
recommended actions on Consent Agenda Item No. 1, and Consent Resolutions 2
through 4, including the approval and adoption of Resolution No. 3667 New
Series, Resolution No. 3668 New Series, and Resolution No. 3669 New Series.
In response to Mayor Scruggs' question, Mr. Flaaen stated Item 4 relates to a
Memorandum of Understanding between the City, the Tourism and Sports Authority
and B&B Holdings. He assured Mayor Scruggs that approval of Item 4 would not
jeopardize the city's ability to negotiate the additional costs discussed during today's
City Council Budget Workshop.
Upon the call for the question, the motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING — LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
5. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP-02-12 AND REZONING APPLICATION Z-02-
32: 7250 WEST GRANDVIEW ROAD
Ms. Tracy Stevens, Senior, Planner presented this item.
This is a request by Earl, Curley, and Lagarde, P.C. representing Courtland
Homes to amend the General Plan land Use Map from Medium Density Residential 3.5-
5 dwelling units per acre to Office and rezone 4.7 gross acres of property from R1-6
PRD (Single Residence, Planned Residential Development) and R1-6 MH (Single
Residence, Mobile Home) to C-O (Commercial Office). The property is located at the
northeast corner of 73rd Avenue and Grandview Road.
The C-O (Commercial Office) zoning district is the most appropriate zoning to
implement the proposed General Plan designation of Office at this location. C-O allows
office uses by right and allows childcare centers, full service restaurants, and churches
subject to Conditional Use Permit approval. The proposed Office designation
encourages professional office/service businesses that are quiet, built at a residential
scale, and provide low to moderate traffic volumes. This will provide a desirable
transition between the high density residential to the east and the single family
residential to the south.
There is no demand for mobile home development at this location. The
proposed zoning will protect adjacent residences by requiring strict performance
standards including setbacks equal to building height, a 6 foot masonry screen wall,
and a 15 foot landscape buffer along property lines.
At their public hearing on April 17, 2003 the Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend approval of GP-02-12 and Z-02-32, subject to one
stipulation.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and approve GP-02-12
and Z-02-32, subject to the stipulation recommended by the Planning Commission.
5
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 5. As there
were no comments, Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Goulet, to approve General Plan
Amendment GP-02-12 and Rezoning Application Z-02-32. The motion carried
unanimously.
6. REZONING APPLICATION Z-02-19: 9300 WEST GLENDALE AVENUE
Ms. Tracy Stevens, Senior Planner, presented this item.
This is a request by Earl, Curley and Lagarde, P.C. representing Trammell Crow
Company to rezone 157.6 gross acres of property from A-1 (Agricultural) to PAD
(Planned Area Development) for an employment or mixed use development
emphasizing employment uses with a limited amount of retail and/or residential uses.
The property is located at the northwest corner of 91st Avenue and Glendale Avenue.
The PAD is the most appropriate zoning district to implement the General Plan
designation of Corporate Commerce Center. The PAD district is an appropriate district
for developing a major employment center with mixed use development unified by
architecture, landscaping, signage, and lighting with complimentary land uses such as
retail and residential.
The permitted uses listed for the employment, retail, and residential districts are
reasonable, and appropriate given the location of the parcels. The uses listed are
appropriate and will be compatible with future developments surrounding the site. The
development plan proposes a common architectural design theme that will create a
high quality employment or mixed use development.
On April 3, 2003, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Z-02-19,
subject to thirteen stipulations.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and approve Z-02-19,
subject to the stipulations recommended by the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Clark asked if the applicant's lighting package complies with the
city's Dark Skies Ordinance. Ms. Stevens responded yes. Councilmember Clark
expressed concern about the project's density. Ms. Stevens said staff discussed a
lower density with the applicant during the review process, but the General Plan
provides for a variety of dwelling units. Councilmember Clark asked what density was
granted for the mixed-use development associated with the Coyotes' Arena. Ms.
Stevens answered 30 units per acre. Councilmember Clark said she believes the
maximum number of units per acre was set at 23. Ms. Stevens was unsure of the exact
number. Councilmember Clark asked if there will be any other water features in the
project, other than the one entryway monument. Ms. Stevens responded no.
6
Councilmember Clark asked if the city's sign ordinance takes precedence over the sign
packaged proposed by the applicant. Ms. Stevens explained the applicant is proposing
two deviations from the city's sign ordinance, one related to building mounted signs for
office buildings and the second related to monument signs for retail uses.
Councilmember Clark asked about the applicant's request for permission to go through
the Planning Department if it later decides to change the residential land use to another
use, pointing out such changes are typically brought before the Planning Commission
and City Council. Ms. Stevens explained staff requested the applicant put a
Development Master Plan in place that will allow staff to ensure appropriate land uses
are planned for adjacent sites and that circulation plans, open space and that building
arrangements are acceptable. Councilmember Clark asked if staff has any
reservations about removing the Planning Commission and Council from the process.
She also asked if allowing the developer in this case to bypass the process would set a
precedent for other developers in the future. Ms. Stevens acknowledged that other
applicants could request a similar process.
Councilmember Goulet asked if the signs proposed by the applicant are
necessarily worse than those allowed by the city's sign ordinance. Ms. Stevens said
probably not, given the uniqueness of the project and the size of the proposed
buildings. Councilmember Goulet asked if an applicant is required to carry a theme
associated with the project's name throughout the entire project. Ms. Stevens said no.
Mayor Scruggs stated the Planning Commission addressed the signage issue
through a stipulation requiring all retail district signs meet the City of Glendale Zoning
Ordinance sign requirements for retail buildings. Ms. Stevens agreed. Mayor Scruggs
asked if, then, the city's sign ordinance would prevail. Ms. Stevens responded yes.
Mayor Scruggs asked what will dictate what the applicant is granted in terms of the
number of dwelling units per acre. Ms. Stevens explained the development standards,
as proposed, allow 8 to 30 dwelling units per acre. She said the applicant would be
allowed 30 dwelling units per acre if that was the number proposed in the PAD and the
PAD were approved. She pointed out some of the older portions of Glendale have
densities as high as 43 units per acre. Mayor Scruggs asked if any requests for 30
units per acre have been approved in the past decade. Mr. Jon Froke, Planning
Director, responded no. He stated a PAD associated with a project as complex as the
one proposed by the applicant will be subjected to a number of staff reviews. He said,
while staff suggested the applicant propose a lesser density, the applicant refused. He
explained staff worked closely with the applicant and Trammel Crow during the PAD
review to identify an internal review process, known as the Development Master Plan
process, that will allow some level of flexibility for both the applicant and the city with
regard to final users.
Mayor Scruggs stated the applicant has proposed reducing the size of parking
spaces for the employment and residential uses to 9 feet and transferring the difference
into open space. Mr. Froke said the city's philosophy with regard to parking spaces is
that in high turnover areas, such as retail, spaces are held to a minimum width of 10
7
feet. He stated in areas with less turnover, such as employment and residential uses, a
10 foot width is less critical. He pointed out the Planning Commission actually
embraced the idea of reducing parking widths in exchange for open space.
Councilmember Martinez asked if the flexibility provided by the fourth stipulation
has been done before by the City of Glendale. Mr. Froke explained the city is very
desirous of employment land uses. He said the applicant is proposing an either/or
situation, not knowing what the final use will be. Councilmember Martinez asked, if
approved as written, would the applicant be allowed to build 30 dwelling units per acre
without further approval from the city. Mr. Froke said the development standards
contained in the PAD provide a range, however, it will be difficult to achieve 30 dwelling
units per acre, given the requirements of the various reviewing agencies.
Councilmember Martinez asked what is the width of the parking spaces at the Coyotes
Arena. Mr. Froke responded 9 feet.
Councilmember Clark asked if, as proposed, the applicant could request further
employment uses on land reserved for residential uses. Mr. Froke answered yes.
Councilmember Clark said the city has a vision for the west valley of high quality
employment with high paying jobs for Glendale residents. She stated, however, the
applicant would only have to go through the Development Master Plan Process to
locate a permitted employment use in a residential area, even if the employment use
does not match the city's vision. Mr. Froke assured Councilmember Clark that, if such
a situation presented itself, staff would work closely with the Economic Development
Department to ensure any proposed use would be in line with their vision for the
western area.
In response to Councilmember Goulet's question, Mr. Froke explained the Floor
Area Ratio is consistent with the Western Area Plan, however, it is questionable as to
whether the applicant will be able to achieve that high of an FAR. He said the ultimate
FAR will depend on the parcel size, the size of the building and the end user of the
parcel.
Mayor Scruggs pointed out the Planning Commission stipulated the FAR
according to the relationship of the parcels to Zanjero Boulevard. Mr. Froke agreed.
Councilmember Clark asked if Zanjero Boulevard will have a median. Mr. Froke
explained the collector streets in the project south of Glendale Avenue will have
landscaped medians and staff would like to see a similar concept carried into the
Zanjero Boulevard corridor. He said questions with regard to how extensive the
medians will be will be resolved during the design review process. Councilmember
Clark pointed out the city may not get a landscaped median if it does not stipulate to
one. Mr. Froke agreed.
Mike Curley, Applicant's representative, said they have worked closely with city
staff on the proposed project for the past year-and-a-half. He said both parties have
viewed the property as an ideal master plan opportunity. He stated no one in the valley
8
has more development expertise than Trammel Crow, noting they are the largest
industrial developer, the second largest office developer and the third largest property
manager in the country. He pointed out Trammel Crow met with the city's Economic
Development Department and various representatives of the City Council and Mayor's
Office prior to purchasing the property to ensure their vision for the property matched
that of the city's.
Mr. Curley reviewed the applicant's landscape plan, noting there will be a
minimum of 50 feet of landscaping, as well as large landscape triangles and major
entranceways. He stated the entranceways will include significant water features,
medians and decorative pavement. He stated the applicant attended every Western
Area General Plan Update meeting and believes the proposed project to be in concert
with every single aspect of the plan. He said, historically, the city has looked at
properties in terms of trying to gain employment. He explained that their request for
flexibility is necessary to allow the applicant to accommodate a major campus use. He
pointed out the applicant would only be able to eliminate residential and retail uses in
favor of employment uses. He said the delay that would result from a rezoning case
would place Trammel Crow and the city at a disadvantage to surrounding communities.
He disagreed with concerns that the applicant's request for flexibility would set a
precedence for future developers, stating the subject property is very unique and is
located in a unique part of the city With regard to concerns about the reduced width
parking spaces, Mr. Curley pointed out a nine-foot width is standard throughout the
valley.
In terms of the multi-family density, he said the cities of Phoenix and Tempe, who
have had a lot of success with multi-family projects, have both insisted that the
densities for suburban type developments be higher. He explained the intent is to
create an urban environment where people live in the employment core. He said the
higher density proposed by the applicant is appropriate because the project is not
located adjacent to single family.
Mr. Curley submitted a letter dated May 13, 2003, clarifying Stipulations 7, 12 and
13. He explained the original wording of Stipulation 7 would have required
improvements to 91St Avenue once the one-acre site on 95th Avenue is developed. He
said the landscape medians required in Stipulation 12 do not make sequential sense
because median cuts will be determined by the uses. With regard to Stipulation 13, Mr.
Curley asked that the same signage entitlements afforded the Ellman site be given to
the applicant if a big box retail user locates on parcels, P, Q, R, 5, and T. He said,
aside from the modifications mentioned, the applicant is in agreement with staff's
stipulations.
Mayor Scruggs asked if the applicant is requesting signage that matches that
granted to the property to the south. Mr. Curley responded yes, pointing out the two
projects will compete directly against each other.
9
Councilmember Clark asked if the residential dwelling units are expected to
support the retail and employment components of the project. Mr. Curley answered
yes. Councilmember Clark pointed out 20 units per acre equates to 400 apartments
and 30 units equates to more than 660 apartments. She said most retailers and
employers take a much broader view, relying upon all residences within at least a five
mile area for support. She said, while similar densities have been granted in other
cities, she does not see any compelling reason to grant such a high density for the
subject property. Mr. Curley clarified that the 640 residential units are not expected to
solely support the one million square feet of retail uses. He said the amount of traffic
and activity generated by the proposed multi-family component will be relatively
insignificant compared to the intensity created by the retail uses. He said the city wants
to provide an opportunity for people to live and socialize close to where they work.
Councilmember Clark reiterated her position that granting the applicant's request for
flexibility will be precedent setting. Mr. Curley explained that, if accommodating a
particular user required that the residential component be encroached upon, the DMP
process would require the applicant to site plan the entire parcel as well as the parcel
adjacent to that parcel to ensure both interconnect in terms of building locations,
circulation, open space, parking and landscaping. He stated their intent is to allow the
city to capture major employment users that might go elsewhere if forced to go through
the rezoning process. Councilmember Clark commented that, while the applicant's
purpose is noble, approval would open the door for other developers to request similar
treatment.
In response to Vice Mayor Eggleston's question, Mr. Curley stated they envision
the multi-family to be three story apartments, noting the maximum building height is 96
feet.
Mayor Scruggs asked if any one of Parcels P, Q, R, S, or T could, in and of
themselves, accommodate a big box retailer. Mr. Curley stated it would probably
require a combination of five or six of the individual parcels. Mayor Scruggs asked what
was permitted in terms of signage for the project to the south. Mr. Curley stated
Council allowed up to 450 square feet for the 16.5 acre site, in the event they get a big
box user. He clarified the applicant's site has 43 acres of retail. With regard to the
applicant's proposed language for Stipulation 7, Mayor Scruggs asked if the applicant
would bond for half of the median prior to issuance of any building permits for
development that occurs on Parcels J through T. Mr. Curley responded yes.
Mr. Mahoney, Applicant representing Trammell Crow, stated the number one goal
of the Western Area General Plan Update is to build a strong employment base that
provides a variety of high paying jobs for Glendale residents. He noted Trammel Crow
has helped Bank of America, Bank One and American Express find campus locations in
the valley. He explained the process a corporation goes through when looking for a
new site, stating a CEO is unlikely to consider any site involved in a land use issue. He
stated their request for flexibility will allow them to provide a user with the entire 80
acres without having to get a land use decision. He said the employees of the
businesses their project is likely to attract want to live in an urban area with lively
10
pedestrian streets. He talked about the obstacle that landscaped medians create when
trying to access businesses, stating, they would like to put the landscaped relief in
areas consistent with where the parcels divide. With regard to the project's name,
Zanjero, Mr. Mahoney said he picked the name because of the agricultural heritage of
the area. He explained their request concerning signage will put them on a level
playing field with their nearest competitor.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 6.
Sheryl Wearsma, a resident of the City of Glendale, said she understands
Council's concerns about the signage. She expressed her opinion the project is not so
large that it justifies allowing the developer to bypass Planning and Zoning, stating
public involvement is very important.
Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Clark to add a stipulation limiting residential density to 8
to 20 dwelling units per acre. The motion failed due to lack of a second.
It was moved by Clark to add a stipulation requiring a continuous
landscaped median along Zanjero Boulevard. The motion failed due to lack of a
second.
It was moved by Clark to add a stipulation making changes in land use
subject to the recommendation of the Planning Commission and City Council
approval. The motion failed due to lack of a second.
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Frate, to approve Rezoning
Application Z-02-19, subject to the Planning Commission's recommendation and
the modified stipulations submitted by the Applicant.
Councilmember Clark expressed her opinion the most onerous stipulation is the
one related to signage. She said she did not like it when the city granted 450 square
feet of signage in the Ellman project and she does not like it any better with regard to
the proposed project. She said each project should be considered based on its own
merit, expressing her opinion the applicant's signage request is inappropriate.
Mayor Scruggs said she will support the flexible approach recommended by the
applicant because of current negotiations for a major user to locate on the site and the
fact that requiring the user to go through a six month zoning process could jeopardize
those negotiations. She said she will also support the applicant's request for increased
signage and higher density. She stated she has seen and admired the high density
projects referenced by the applicant and would not have imagined them to be 60 units
to the acre. She said those projects, as well as Trammel Crow's reputation, helped
alleviate her concerns.
11
Councilmember Martinez expressed his opinion the project meets the city's goals
as set forth in the Western Area General Plan Update. He said, therefore, he will
support the motion to approve.
Councilmember Frate said, although he initially had concerns about the proposed
density, the pictures of similar projects presented by the Applicant and the lack of public
opposition to the density have allayed his concerns. He expressed his opinion the
proposed signage will be in proportion to the building and appropriate for the site.
Councilmember Goulet agreed the employees that will be drawn to the project will
have different expectations for the residential environment. He said Mr. Curley made
several strong points in support of the project, agreeing the size and location of the
signage and the higher density levels being proposed will be of little consequence given
the retail and commercial development expected to occur in the area. He stated he is
confident in the Design Review process and believes the project will be very good for
the city.
With regard to Councilmember Clark's concerns about setting a precedence,
Mayor Scruggs said, unlike the development to the south, the parcels identified as
potential residential parcels are not near any single family residential developments.
Councilmember Clark stated she will not support the project for three reasons: 1)
she believes the concept of flexibility will be precedent setting and will remove a layer of
public scrutiny; 2) the proposed signage will negatively impact homes located across
the street from the project; and 3) there are no assurances that the city's vision for
quality employment will be realized. She expressed her opinion citizens did not come
to speak out against the project because their concerns over the Ellman project were
never addressed by the Council.
Councilmember Martinez pointed out the Planning Commission also approved the
project with a vote of 6 to 1.
Mr. Flaaen asked if Councilmember Goulet's stipulations included the timing of
improvements referenced in Stipulation 6. Councilmember Goulet responded yes. Mr.
Froke explained the changes relate to Stipulation 6 as presented at the Planning
Commission on April 3. Councilmember Goulet clarified his motion included the
modified language for Stipulation 6 and the amended Stipulations submitted by the
Applicant.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 to 1 with the following Councilmembers
voting "aye": Eggleston, Frate, Goulet, Martinez, Scruggs, Councilmembers
voting "nay": Clark.
The stipulations as approved in the motion are as follows:
12
1. Development shall be in substantial conformance with the development plan and
narrative of the Zanjero PAD dated January 20, 2003.
2. Dedication of additional right-of-way on Glendale Avenue to provide for a total
half-street width of 65-feet and an additional 5-feet at the 91st Avenue and 95th
Avenue intersection shall be made before issuing any building permits for any
part of the project.
3. Dedication of additional right-of-way on 91st Avenue to provide a total half-width
of 65-feet and an additional 5-feet at the Glendale Avenue intersection shall be
made before issuing any building permits for any part of the project.
4. Dedication of additional right-of-way on 95th Avenue to provide a total half-width
of 55-feet shall be made before issuing any building permits for any part of the
project. Sidewalk shall be within a 5-foot easement adjacent to said right-of-way
dedication.
5. Dedication of additional right-of-way on Zanjero Boulevard to provide a total full-
width of 90-feet at the mid-block, 100-feet at the 91st Avenue intersection, and
115 feet at the Glendale Avenue intersection shall be made before issuing any
building permits for any part of the project.
6. All half-street improvements on Glendale Avenue, 91st Avenue, 95th Avenue, and
full street improvements on Zanjero Boulevard, which are adjacent to the parcel
to be developed, shall be completed prior to Certificate of Occupancy for said
development. Required improvement standards are determined by the City of
Glendale Design Guidelines for Site Development and Infrastructure
Construction.
7. The developer shall be responsible to design the full landscape median along
91st Avenue and bond for half of the median prior to issuing any building permits
for any development which occurs on parcels J-T.
8. The bus stop and bus bay location on 91st Avenue shall be relocated south of
Zanjero Boulevard.
9. "Boardinghouse" shall be removed from the Residential Use List.
10. All development to the east, north, and south of Zanjero Boulevard shall be
subject to a Far of .50 or less. All remaining development shall be subject to
1.00 or less.
11. All Landscape improvements on Glendale Avenue shall be designed in
accordance with the West Glendale Avenue Design Plan.
12. Landscape medians shall be required throughout Zanjero Boulevard. The
13
nature, frequency and locations of the landscape medians in Zanjero Boulevard
shall be determined at the time of Development Master Plan or Design Review.
13. All Retail district signs shall meet the City of Glendale Zoning Ordinance sign
requirements for retail buildings with the exception that if a big box retail user
locates on parcels, P,Q,R,S,T the allowable square-footage shall be 450 square-
feet for the Big Box use,
PUBLIC HEARING — LIQUOR LICENSES
7. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-870 OGGI'S PIZZA & BREWING COMPANY
(RESTAURANT LICENSE)
This is a request for a new series 12 (restaurant) license for Oggi's Pizza &
Brewing Company, which will be located at 6681 W. Beardsley Road. There have been
no prior businesses at this location. The approval of this license will increase the total
number of liquor licenses in this area by one.
Also on tonight's agenda is an application for a series 3 microbrewery license for
the applicant's operation as a microbrewery.
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 Maricopa County Health Department have reviewed the
application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward to the Arizona
Department of Liquor Licenses and Control with the recommendation for approval.
8. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-871 OGGI'S PIZZA & BREWING COMPANY
(MICROBREWERY LICENSE)
This is a request for a new series 3 (microbrewery) license for Oggi's Pizza &
Brewing Company, which will be located at 6681 W. Beardsley Road. There have been
no prior businesses at this location. The approval of this license will increase the total
number of liquor licenses in this area by one.
Also on tonight's agenda is an application for a series 12 restaurant license for the
applicant's operation as a restaurant at this location.
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 Maricopa County Health Department have reviewed the
application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
14
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward to the Arizona
Department of Liquor Licenses and Control with the recommendation for approval.
9. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-875 NORTHERN LOUNGE
This is a request for a person transfer of a series 6 (on- & off-sale retail, all liquor)
license for Northern Lounge located at 5008 W. Northern Avenue. The previous owner
operated this business as Northern Lounge and held a series 6 (on- & off-sale retail, all
liquor) license at this location.
The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim
permit issued by the 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. The nearest church, Rain in
the Desert Fellowship, is 80 feet from the establishment. However, the 300-foot rule
prohibiting a retail liquor establishment from a church does not apply because the liquor
license was there prior to the church.
No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period. The Planning
Department, the Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health Department have
reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward to the Arizona
Department of Liquor Licenses and Control with the recommendation for approval.
10. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-876 3 MARGARITAS
This is a request for a new series 12 (restaurant) license for 3 Margaritas located
at 5171 W. Bell Road. The previous owner operated this business as Timber Lodge
Steakhouse and held a series 12 (restaurant) license at this location.
The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim
permit issued by the 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 Maricopa County Health Department have reviewed the
application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
15
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward to the Arizona
Department of Liquor Licenses and Control with the recommendation for approval.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item Numbers 7
through 10. As there were no comments, Mayor Scruggs closed the public
hearing.
It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Martinez, to forward Liquor License
Applications No. 3-870 for Oggi's Pizza & Brewing Company, No. 3-871 for Oggi's
Pizza & Brewing Company and No. 3-875 for Northern Lounge and No. 3-876 for 3
Margaritas, to the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control,
with the recommendation for approval. The motion carried unanimously.
ORDINANCES
11. ABANDONMENT OF PUBLIC ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT AT
PARKSIDE LANE EAST OF 6181- LANE
Ms. Kathy Sholly, Property Manager, presented this item.
This is a request to abandon an existing twenty-five foot wide public access and
utility easement, located along the south side of Parkside Lane, east of 61st Lane. The
easement was originally granted to the city to accommodate two home sites on the
adjacent property, on which the homes would face north and south. The owner of the
property has recently submitted building plans changing the orientation of these
proposed residences. The owner will need to extinguish this easement in order to
develop the property according to the new conceptual plan.
There are no facilities located within the area to be abandoned. No objections to
the abandonment have been received by any department within the city, nor from any
outside utility company.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance abandoning this easement.
Ordinance No. 2318 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 PUBLIC ACCESS
AND UTILITY EASEMENT AT PARKSIDE LANE EAST OF 61ST LANE IN
GLENDALE, ARIZONA 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 Goulet, to approve Ordinance
No. 2318 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
16
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and
Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
12. SALT RIVER PROJECT UTILITY EASEMENT AT 6181- AVENUE AND BROWN
STREET
Ms. Kathy Sholly, Property Manager, presented this item.
This is a request to grant a utility easement to Salt River Project (SRP). The
easement is necessary to provide electrical service to the city's newly constructed Adult
Center at 59th Avenue and Brown Street. The easement will be located, in part, in the
existing city right-of-way for 61st Avenue, with another portion lying along the adult
center's northeasterly property line.
No objections have been received from any other city department.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a utility easement in favor of Salt
River Project.
Ordinance No. 2319 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 CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A UTILITY
EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SALT RIVER PROJECT FOR THE ELECTRICAL
SERVICES AT 61ST AVENUE AND BROWN STREET; AND ORDERING THAT A
CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE BE RECORDED
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to approve Ordinance No.
2319 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and
Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
13. ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE UTILITY EASEMENT AT THE GLENDALE
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Ms. Kathy Sholly, Property Manager, presented this item.
This is a request to grant Arizona Public Service (APS) a utility easement. This
proposed easement is located at 6575 North Glen Harbor Boulevard at the Glendale
Municipal Airport. The purpose of this easement is to enable APS to supply power to a
transmitter, that will provide electrical service to Temple Air Center Hangers, a tenant of
the city's.
This easement will encompass approximately 850 square feet. No objections
have been received from any other city department.
17
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a utility easement in favor of Arizona
Public Service.
Ordinance No. 2320 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 CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A UTILITY
EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF POWER LINES AND RELATED FACILITIES AT THE GLENDALE
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT; AND ORDERING THAT A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS
ORDINANCE BE RECORDED
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Frate, to approve Ordinance No.
2320 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and
Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
14. ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE UTILITY EASEMENT AT 57TH AVENUE AND
UNION HILLS DRIVE
Ms. Kathy Sholly, Property Manager, presented this item.
This is a request to grant a utility easement to Arizona Public Service (APS).
The proposed easement is located at 57th Avenue and Union Hills Drive in Foothills
Park Phase II. The easement will enable APS to supply power to the city's newly
developed skate park facility.
This easement will encompass approximately 340 square feet. No objections
have been received from any other city department.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute a utility easement in favor of Arizona
Public Service.
Ordinance No. 2321 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 CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A UTILITY
EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF POWER LINES AND RELATED FACILITIES AT 57TH AVENUE
AND UNION HILLS DRIVE; AND ORDERING THAT A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS
ORDINANCE BE RECORDED
It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Martinez, to approve Ordinance
No. 2321 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and
Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
18
REQUEST FOR FUTURE WORKSHOP AND EXECUTIVE SESSION
It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Frate, to hold a City Council
Budget Workshop meeting at 1:30 p.m., in Room B-3, of the City Council
Chambers on Tuesday, May 20, 2003, to be followed by an Executive Session
pursuant to A.R.S. 38-431.03. The motion carried unanimously.
MOTION TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER LIEBERMAN
It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Martinez, to excuse
Councilmember Lieberman from tonight's meeting. The motion carried
unanimously.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Leonardo Perona, through his interpreter, Raquel Mario, addressed the Council
about JD Steel's treatment of its workers. He said they have asked the Council
members on several occasions for their support so that the workers can have dignity
and justice. He said the City of Glendale made promising first steps, inquiring with J.D.
Steel and Perini Building. He stated Perini wrote a letter to JD Steel requiring breaks
and the workers returned to work. He said, unfortunately, JD Steel harassed many of
the workers when they asked to take a break and were told JD Steel never authorized
breaks. He acknowledged that JD Steel has almost completed the arena project, but
encouraged the city to continue efforts to ensure workers receive dignity and respect on
the job. He stated the City of Glendale has a moral responsibility to hire responsible
contractors that will respect and abide by the laws. He asked the city to ensure that
unscrupulous contractors are not hired for the Cardinal's stadium project.
Debra Kist, a resident of the City of Glendale, said she has attended several
meetings about Wal-Mart's anticipated move to the Costco building and Target's move
to 51st Avenue. She expressed concern about the vacant big box store that will be left
behind when Target moves and the increased traffic that will result in the area of 51st
Avenue and Peoria. She questioned the fate of other stores in the center at 43rd
Avenue and urged the city to research every avenue for redeveloping that area. She
acknowledged that traffic issues already exist, stating, however, an amendment to the
Nolan vs. Dolan ruling holds a developer responsible for any increase they cause to an
existing problem. She acknowledged that attendance at the Wal-Mart meetings was
low, suggesting future meetings be held closer to the impacted area. She stated the
area at 59th Avenue and Bell already has five empty big-box stores. She suggested
they convert the location north of Bell to a different type of business, like Federation or
Bechtel. She agreed with Councilmember Clark's comments that residents often feel
frustrated and that their voices are not heard.
COUNCIL COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
19
Councilmember Clark announced National Police Memorial Week is underway
and a recognition ceremony will be held in Washington D.C. on Wednesday. She said
the city will hold a ceremony Thursday morning, encouraging the public to attend and
pay homage to officers who have given their lives in service to the city. She pointed
out, nationally, five officers have died as a result of their vehicles being rear-ended and
catching fire. She stated police officers have enough to worry about and should not
have to question the safety of the vehicles in which they ride.
Councilmember Goulet stated the city's firefighters were out building another
Habitat for Humanity home early this morning. He said the home will be dedicated
Saturday morning and thanked those involved in its construction.
Vice Mayor Eggleston thanked the police volunteers who donated their time to
raise funds for the DARE Program.
Councilmember Martinez announced he and Councilmember Frate will host a
meeting concerning the recent boundary changes on Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. at
Canyon Elementary School.
Councilmember Frate said he enjoyed attending the opening of Congressman
Trent Franks' district office in the Sahuaro District.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
15amelr anna - City lerk
20