HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 11/25/2003 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA,
HELD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 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, H. Philip Lieberman, and Manuel D. Martinez.
Also present were Ed Beasley, City Manager; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City
Manager; Jon Paladini, Deputy 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 4 resolutions and 5 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.
Mayor Scruggs welcomed and introduced Daniel Mortenson, Sam Mortenson,
Matthew Deuel, Jesus Ruiz, and Venture Scout Leader Carl Crighter of Scout Troop
667.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 14, 2003 AND OCTOBER 28,
2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to dispense with the
reading of the minutes of the October 14, 2003 and the October 28, 2003 Regular
City Council meetings, 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 Numbers 1 through 12 and Ms.
Pamela Hanna, City Clerk, read consent agenda resolutions numbers 13 and 14 by
number and title.
Councilmember Lieberman requested item number 7 be heard separately.
1. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT - WEST AREA REGIONAL
PARKS FACILITY PHASE ONE
This is a request for the City Council to award a construction contract to Norquay
Construction to construct phase one improvements at the West Area Regional Park at
83rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road.
This park is one of the strategic elements in the city's recently adopted Parks
and Recreation Master Plan.
1
At the February 5, 2002 workshop, Council endorsed the master plan for the
entire 88-acre site and amended Olsson Associates professional services agreement to
prepare the contract documents at the regular meeting of July 22, 2003. Phase one
improvements will provide the initial recreation facilities at the regional park and
comprise seven acres of the 88-acre park site. Amenities designed in this phase
include play equipment, water playground, restroom, ramadas, landscaping, irrigation,
parking, security, basketball court and game lighting. All of the stated improvements are
elements of the master plan layout for the overall park.
On October 30, 2003 four bids were received and opened. The bid documents
include two alternates: alternate one represents a complete basketball court; and
alternate two represents a water play area. Norquay Construction, a qualified licensed
contractor, submitted the lowest base bid with alternates in the amount of
$1,401 ,164.41.
Construction of this facility will mark the initial steps in providing needed services
to a rapidly growing segment of the community.
All of the elements of this project are in compliance with the adopted master
plan. Development of the master plan included numerous public meetings held to
gather input from the community and follow up meetings held to review the resulting
designs.
Funds for this project are available in the Fiscal Year 2003-2004 Capital
Improvement Plan, Western Area Regional Park, Park Bond Funds, Account No. 36-
8948-8300 ($1 ,207,756.51) and W. Area Regional Park Grant, Account No. 47-8069-
8300 ($193,407.90).
Grants Capital One-Time Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
Expense Cost
X $1,401,164.4 $1 ,401,164.41
1
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number:
Western Area Regional Park, Park Bond Funds, 36-8948-8300
W. Area Regional Park Grant, 47-8069-8300
Approve award of the construction contract with Norquay Construction for the
base bid $1,126,248.01, alternate one $81,508.50 and alternate two $193,407.90 for a
total award amount of $1,401 ,164.41.
2. CHANGE ORDER NO. ONE AND FINAL - 67TH AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS,
ARIZONA CANAL TO BELL ROAD
2
This is a request for the City Council to approve change order number one and
final to the construction contract with Haydon Building Corporation for the 67th Avenue
improvements, Arizona Canal to Bell Road.
The project was delayed through no fault of the contractor for inclement weather
and private utility conflicts. These delays caused the construction to extend beyond the
original November 16, 2002 completion date end into the holiday season. The city is
submitting a claim to the utility companies for their share of the cost associated with the
delays caused by the utility conflicts. The city requested that there be no lane
restrictions on evenings and weekends during the holiday shopping season. Therefore
completion date was revised to February 15, 2003.
Additional work was also requested of the contractor to provide additional
community relations newsletters during the period of delay, improvement of the
drainage around the sanitary sewer pump station south of the Arizona Canal, street
repair of a waterline break adjacent to but not related to the construction, installation of
additional landscape irrigation components for properties not previously landscaped
along 67th Avenue and additional temporary traffic control. Negotiations for this change
order were over an extended period due to changes in management of the contractor
and the final approval from city staff on the final change amount.
On March 26, 2002, Council awarded the construction contract to Haydon
Building Corporation.
67th Avenue is a major arterial street that carries a large volume of traffic from
the residential areas of the city to the commercial areas in the vicinity of Bell Road. The
street improvements provide a safe roadway to carry the high traffic volumes and
provide landscaping and walls to enhance the visual impact of the major roadway.
During construction, weekly newsletters were sent to the adjacent residents
informing them of the progress on the project.
The total amount of the change order is $102,348.19, which brings the total cost
of the project to $1,935,932.09. Funds for the construction of this project were included
in the Capital Improvement Program, 67th Avenue-Arizona Canal to Bell Road.
Additional funding to accomplish the payment to the contractor requires the following
fund transfers: $63,081 from 67th Avenue-Grovers to Union Hills, Account No. 61-8814-
8300 and $9,157.87 from Street Beautification, Account No. 31-8559-8300 to 67th
Avenue-Arizona Canal to Bell Road, Account No. 61-9564-8300.
3
Grants Capital One-Time Cost Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
, Expense
X $102,348.1 $102,348.1
9 9
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number:
67th Avenue —Arizona Canal to Bell Road, Account No. 61-9564-8300
The recommendation was to approve the fund transfer and change order one
and final to the construction contract with Haydon Building Corporation in the amount of
$102,138.19.
3. CHANGE ORDER NO. TWO AND FINAL — GLENDALE ADULT CENTER
This is a request for City Council approval of change order number two and final
to the construction contract with D. L. Withers Construction, LC for the Glendale Adult
Center project.
This change order is for additional work necessary to complete the construction
of the Glendale Adult Center. The additional work included: Electrical work required to
accommodate a revised location for the use of a projector and screen; the installation of
backflow prevention cages as required by city engineering standards; the addition of
structural steel in the front canopy and masonry columns; upgraded acoustical ceiling
tile; painting of the elevator shaft for aesthetic improvement; revisions to mirrors and
ballet bars to maximize space and room layout in the aerobic and exercise rooms; and
the installation of larger size building address numbers to accommodate the facility.
The construction contract was awarded by Council to D. L. Withers March 26,
2002, in the amount of $5,066,000. Change order number one was approved August
15, 2003 in the amount of $47,083. Change order number one consisted of the
relocation of elevator equipment and HVAC ductwork as required by building code,
electrical revisions for kitchen and office equipment, and additional fire alarm equipment
to satisfy building code.
The Glendale Adult Center benefits the community by providing a place where
citizens can come to enjoy a variety of recreational programs and participate in
organizational meetings and educational programs.
The total amount of the change order is $16,565, resulting in a revised contract
amount of $5,129,648. The overall project remains under budget. Engineering staff has
reviewed the costs and found them to be fair and reasonable. Funds are available in
Adult Center Relocation, Account No. 36-8057-8300.
4
Grants Capital One-Time Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
Expense Cost
X $16,565 $16,565
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number:
Adult Center Relocation, Account No. 36-8057-8300
The recommendation was to approve change order number two and final to the
construction contract with D. L. Withers Construction, LC in the amount of $16,565.
4. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - CATLIN COURT ALLEYWAYS
This is a request for City Council approval of a professional services agreement
with Sherman Group, Inc. The services provided under this agreement are for the
design and construction management for the Catlin Court Alleyways project.
For the past 12 years Council has endorsed a series of streetscape improvement
projects in the Catlin Court Shopping District that has improved the aesthetics of the
area and enhanced the pedestrian experience. The improvements provided by this
project will further Council's policies and goals for the stabilization and enhancement of
the Catlin Court Shopping District.
The city received a federal matching funds grant through the Arizona Department
of Transportation (ADOT), Transportation Enhancement Fund. Thegrant addresses
four alleyways between Myrtle and Palmaire avenues, 59th to 57t avenues. The
alleyways will be designed for safe, shared use by pedestrians, bicyclists and limited
parking. The project is based on the highly successful Dutch "Woonerf' concept where
there is no segregation between motorized and non-motorized traffic. Pedestrians have
priority use. A Design Concept Report and Environmental Assessment Report have
been developed and submitted to ADOT. The review process includes participation
from both the United States Department of Transportation and ADOT with standard
anticipated review time of 18 to 24 months. The timing of the award of this contract was
based on this anticipated review schedule.
A request for proposals (RFP) was sent out to over 100 firms. Ten firms
responded to the RFP and a review committee made up of staff from Engineering and
Field Operations short-listed the applicants to three firms for oral interviews. Sherman
Group, Inc. was selected based upon their project understanding and past experience
on similar projects.
This project will have a direct impact upon the stabilization of the "old downtown"
through creating safe, attractive pedestrian access in areas that are presently
deteriorating alleys. Attractive paving, period lighting and benched rest nodes will be
the features utilized to attract interest and participation from the city and region as a
whole.
5
Since the initial activity of organizing the grant application, the potentially
impacted merchants and property owners have been updated on an ongoing basis by
the project manager's attendance at Downtown Development Corporation's meetings.
Funding for this project is included in the 2003-2004 Capital Improvement
Program, Catlin Court Alley Beautification, 47-9584-8300.
Grants Capital One-Time Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
Expense Cost _
X $217,900 $217,900
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number:
Catlin Court Alley Beautification, 47-9584-8300
The recommendation was to approve the professional services agreement with
Sherman Group, Inc. in the amount of $217,900.
5. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-899 TEXACO STAR MART
This is a request by Randy Nations for the City Council to approve a new series
10 (off-sale retail, beer & wine) license for Texaco Star Mart located at 20207 N. 59th
Avenue. The previous owner operated this business as Texaco Star Mart and held a
series 10 license at this location.
The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim
permit issued by the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses & 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. The Planning
Department, Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health Department have
reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period.
The recommendation was to forward a recommendation for approval to the
Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
6. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-900 FOOD CITY NO. 144
This is a request by Michael Basha for the City Council to approve a person
transfer of a series 9 (off-sale retail, all liquor) license for Food City No. 144 located at
5810 W. Peoria Avenue. The previous owner operated this business as Food 4 Less
and held a series 9 license at this location.
6
The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim
permit issued by the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses & 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. The Planning
Department, Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health Department have
reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period.
The recommendation was to forward a recommendation for approval to the
Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
8. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-903 EL RANCHITO SPORTS BAR
This is a request by Eleazar Lopez for the City Council to approve a person
transfer of a series 7 (on- & off-sale retail, beer & wine) license for El Ranchito Sports
Bar located at 6042 W. Bethany Home Road. The previous owner operated this
business as Aldama's Bar & Grill and held a series 7 license at this location.
The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim
permit issued by the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses & 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. The Planning
Department, Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health Department have
reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period.
The recommendation was to forward a recommendation for approval to the
Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
9. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-904 SLAP SHOTS BAR & GRILL
This is a request by Kenneth Clark for the City Council to approve a person
transfer of a series 6 (on- & off-sale retail, all liquor) license for Slap Shots Bar & Grill
located at 7941 W. Glendale Avenue. The previous owner operated this business as
Slap Shots Bar & Grill and held a series 6 license at this location.
The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim
permit issued by the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses & Control. The approval of
this license will not increase the total number of liquor licenses in this area.
7
The establishment is over 300 feet from any school or church. The Planning
Department, Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health Department have
reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period.
The recommendation was to forward a recommendation for approval to the
Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
10. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-906 CHARLIE'S AMERICAN GRILL
This is a request by David Sanclemente for the City Council to approve a new
series 12 (restaurant) license for Charlie's American Grill, which will be located at 5285
W. Bell Road. The previous owner operated this business as Luby's and did not hold a
liquor license.
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. The Planning
Department, Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health Department have
reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements.
No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period.
The recommendation was to forward a recommendation for approval to the
Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
11. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-907 THE SPICERY
This is a request by Rhonda Ward for the City Council to approve a new series
12 (restaurant) license for The Spicery located at 7141 N. 59th Avenue. There have
been no prior liquor licenses at this location.
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. The nearest church,
Templo la Hermosa de Glendale is 134 feet from the establishment. The 300-foot rule
prohibiting a retail liquor establishment from being within 300 feet of a church does not
apply to a series 12 license.
The Planning Department, Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health
Department have reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all
technical requirements.
8
No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period.
The recommendation was to forward a recommendation for approval to the
Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
12. SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE FOR GOLDEN W.H.E.E.L.
This is a request by Krista Stone for the City Council to approve a request for a
special event liquor license for Golden W.H.E.E.L (Women Helping to Educate and
Enrich Lives). The event is a dinner to raise funds for scholarships and the West Valley
Child Crisis Center, which will be located at the, 13327 N. 65th Drive.
The event will be held from 6:00 p.m. to midnight on Saturday, December 6,
2003. If this license is approved, the total days expended by this applicant will be one
of the allowed 10 days this year.
Under the provisions of Arizona Revised Statutes, Section 4-203.02, the City is
required to recommend approval or disapproval of the license to the Arizona
Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward to the
Department of Liquor Licenses and Control with the recommendation for approval.
CONSENT RESOLUTIONS
13. GLENDALE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT TIEDOWN FEES
This is a request for the City Council to approve an increase to the tiedown fees
charged at the Glendale Municipal Airport.
One of Council's strategic priorities is providing financial stability. The airport is
adjusting fees so as to be more in line with other Valley airports and thus increase
revenues. As the airport strives to become financially self-sufficient, the overall fiscal
stability is enhanced.
The City Auditor completed an audit of the airport in February 2002, which
reviewed all processes, documents, rates and charges. The auditor's report
recommended that all rates and charges at the airport be evaluated. Over the past
several months, Council has evaluated and adjusted the land lease rates and the
terminal lease rates.
A comparison of the tiedown fees charged at other metro Phoenix general
aviation airports indicated that the Glendale Municipal Airport currently has the lowest
tiedown fees in the Valley.
9
The present tiedown fees are $10 a month for single engine aircraft and $15 a
month for twin-engine aircraft. It is recommended that the tiedown fees for both single
engine and twin-engine aircraft be set at $20 a month. In conjunction with the fee
increase, it is recommended that a discount program be made available. A based
tiedown customer can qualify for a $5 per month discount, one of two ways: the
customer pays the tiedown fee annually instead of monthly, as this will greatly reduce
the administration cost associated with monthly billing; and/or the customer has the
aircraft inspected and certified by a properly licensed mechanic, as this will encourage
aircraft owners to keep their aircraft airworthy. Having airworthy aircraft at the airport
benefits the city because the aircraft owner will be more likely to purchase fuel, which
increases the fuel flowage fee revenue the city receives. Each tiedown customer can
qualify for only one of the two available discounts.
If approved, the new tiedown fees will take effect January 1, 2004.
The Council previously reviewed and adjusted the airport land lease rates in July
2002 and adjusted the terminal rates in January 2003. The new tiedown fees will
increase the annual tiedown revenue from $4,320 to between $6,840 and $9,120.
On September 10, 2003, the Aviation Advisory Commission reviewed and voted
unanimously to support the proposed tiedown fees. A memo was sent to each tiedown
customer explaining the fee increase along with the discount program. Each customer
was asked to comment on the changes. The airport administration received no
comments.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution amending the tiedown fees for the Glendale Municipal Airport.
Resolution No. 3715 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, SETTING FORTH THE TIEDOWN FEES AT THE GLENDALE
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
14. PROPOSED INCREASE TO SEWER USER CHARGES
This is a request for the City Council to adopt a resolution declaring the city's
intent to raise sewer user charges and setting the date of a public hearing on the
proposed increases for January 13, 2004.
This sewer user charge increase is required in order for the Sewer Enterprise
Fund to maintain an adequate operational cash reserve and finance a 10-year capital
improvement program necessary for the viability of the sewer system. The rate
increase will offset escalating regulations and mandates set by federal and state
regulatory agencies related to the operational aspects of all City of Glendale
wastewater treatment facilities. Additionally, the City's Utilities Department must be able
10
to meet criteria set by bonding companies as a prerequisite to receiving a superior bond
rating.
In order to be consistent with the Council goals of providing financial stability and
coordinating exceptional service delivery, an increase in sewer rates is necessary.
At the June 5, 2001 Council workshop, an in-depth study of the water and
wastewater system was presented by consultant Black & Veatch. City Council also
reviewed the fiscal year 2001-02 operating budgets, the Capital Improvement Plan for
fiscal years 2002-11 and associated rate recommendations. As evidenced by the study,
the costs of constructing, maintaining and operating the City's utilities system were
continuing to increase. The in-depth study included an evaluation of the existing rate
structure, assessment of the sewer rate calculation formula and evaluation of the
Capital Improvement Plan. The Capital Improvement Plan included the expansion of
the West Area Wastewater Reclamation Facility and improvements to the 91st Avenue
Wastewater Treatment Plant to address both existing and projected treatment
requirements.
Council concurred with the findings of the water and sewer rate analysis
conducted by Black & Veatch, which incorporated the results of the comprehensive
utility system study, and directed staff to begin the three-year process of adopting the
recommended 4% annual sewer revenue adjustment and modification to the sewer
user charge schedule. These adjustments have varying effects on residential and
commercial customers.
This matter was presented to Council at the November 4, 2003 workshop and
Council directed staff to proceed with the process to implement the 4% sewer user rate
increase as authorized on June 5, 2001.
At the June 5, 2001 City Council workshop, Council adopted a notice of intention
to increase sewer user charges and set the public hearing for September 25, 2001.
On September 25, 2001, following the legally prescribed public hearing, Council
approved the first of three yearly 4% increases in sewer user charges.
On July 9, 2002, the City Council adopted a notice of intention to increase sewer
user charges and set the public hearing for September 10, 2002.
On September 10, 2002, the City Council conducted a public hearing and
adopted the resolution implementing a 4% increase in sewer user charge adjustments
effective with the October 2002 sewer utility billing.
On July 8, 2003, the City Council recommended a public hearing be held on
September 9, 2003, regarding the implementation of the revised sewer user charge
adjustments to be effective with the October 2003 sewer utility billing.
11
The proposed increase in sewer user charges was pulled from the September 9,
2003 City Council meeting agenda. Council requested that the item be reviewed and
brought back to City Council at a workshop session.
On November 4, 2003, the intent to raise sewer user charges was presented to
Council. Council directed staff to proceed with the intent to increase sewer user
charges process.
Glendale residents will benefit by continuing to receive excellent sewer services
and quick response times to any problems thereby maintaining the quality of life for
Glendale citizens.
Public input will be received at the future public hearing.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond title and adopt a resolution
declaring the city's intent to raise sewer user charges and setting a January 13, 2004,
public hearing date.
Resolution No. 3716 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 SEWER SERVICE USER FEES PURSUANT
TO GLENDALE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 33, ARTICLE III, SECTION 33-174; AND
SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE
It was moved by Clark and seconded by Frate to approve the recommended
actions on Consent Agenda Item Nos. 1 through 6 and 8 through 14, including the
approval and adoption of Resolution No. 3715 New Series, Resolution No. 3716
New Series, and to forward Liquor License Applications No. 3-899 for Texaco Star
Mart, No. 3-900 for Food City No. 144, 3-903 for El Ranchito Sports Bar, No. 3-904
for Slap Shots Bar & Grill, No. 3-906 for Charlie's American Grill, No. 3-907 for the
Spicery and Special Event Liquor License for Golden W.H.E.E.L. to the State of
Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, with the recommendation for
approval. The motion carried unanimously.
7. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-902 PO JANG MA CHA
Mr. Michael Bailey, Regulatory and Communications Manager, presented this
item.
This is a request by David Van Winkle for the City Council to approve a person
and location transfer of a series 7 (on- & off-sale retail, beer & wine) license for Po Jang
Ma Cha located at 5546 N. 43rd Avenue. The previous owner operated this business as
JC's Fun One Lounge and held a series 6 (on- & off-sale retail, all liquor) license at this
location.
12
The approval of this license will increase the number of liquor licenses in this
area by one. If approved, the existing series 6 at this location will be placed on an
inactive status.
The Planning Department, Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health
Department have reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all
technical requirements.
The Tax and Licensing Department is recommending approval of this
application. While staff has received protests regarding the application, this request for
a Series 7 license is a less intense liquor use at this location. Only beer and wine sales
will be allowed. No hard liquor will be sold. In the event that the Series 7 is not
approved, the Series 6 may remain at the location and the operator will be able to sell
all liquor.
Twenty-four protests were filed signed by 46 residents. The letters received are
from residents living in the Sevilla Neighborhood Association located in Phoenix within
a mile of the proposed liquor application. The protests can be summarized as follows:
• There are enough liquor licenses in the area. Staff has identified 24 licenses
within a one-mile protest. Based upon the fact that this will be replacing a
more intense liquor use, the number of licenses will remain the same with a
decreased liquor intensity in the area.
• Concerns with transients and loitering problems. Staff received the Police
department's review of the application. The Police Department did not
identify any problems in the area.
• Opportunity for the area to be improved due to the Grand Avenue
improvements. Staff did not find any information that the City of Glendale,
City of Phoenix, or Arizona Department of Transportation had any
redevelopment plans at this time in the area.
• Concerns with how the application was filled out. Staff believes that this was
an inadvertent omission of who will be managing the establishment by the
applicant.
The recommendation was to forward a recommendation for approval to the
Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control.
Mr. Bailey confirmed for Councilmember Lieberman that the Manager has
received the necessary Bar and Liquor training from the state. Councilmember
Lieberman asked for a translation of the establishment's name. Mr. Bailey explained
Po Jang Ma Cha translates to the horse and buggy bar and the establishment is
intended to be a karaoke bar. Councilmember Lieberman asked if the owner will
operate the establishment. Mr. Bailey explained the applicant filled out the application
13
as an owner and, therefore, was not required to fill out the Management section. He
said the applicant's brother-in-law will manage the establishment and has taken the
necessary training.
Councilmember Goulet asked if the bar would be forced to close if the Manager
was no longer available or if the owner would be allowed to manage the establishment
even though he has not received the requisite training. Mr. Bailey explained an
individual managing a liquor establishment is required to have training from the state.
He said, therefore, the state would revoke the license or require the applicant or new
manager to obtain the necessary training. He acknowledged that the state may not be
made aware of such situation immediately, stating, however, the ultimate liability
remains with the applicant '
Mayor Scruggs asked if the training requirement is new. Mr. Bailey responded
no. He confirmed the manager of the previous establishment at the subject location
would have been required to obtain the necessary training.
In response to previous questions posed by residents, Mr. Bailey stated the
Articles Of Incorporation indicated the license was for a restaurant with karaoke bar.
Councilmember Lieberman pointed out the total number of liquor licenses stays
the same, even though the other license has been inactive for up to one year. Mr.
Bailey agreed, explaining the current Series 6 license will become inactive if the Series
7 license is approved. He confirmed the nature of the license will change from all liquor
to beer and wine only. He clarified the Series 7 license came from the Canton Garden
Restaurant in Phoenix. He stated the Series 6 license would be eligible for sale.
Councilmember Clark asked if the owner would still have a Series 6 license if the
Series 7 license is denied. Mr. Bailey responded yes. Councilmember Clark suggested
a Series 7 license might be better than a Series 6 license which allows for the sale of all
liquor.
Councilmember Lieberman noted the City Council's action is only a
recommendation to the Arizona Board of Liquor who makes the final decision.
Mr. Bailey confirmed for Councilmember Martinez that the previous business is
no longer in operation. Councilmember Martinez asked if the applicant is under any
kind of time limitations. Mr. Bailey stated the location issue is in perpetuity, therefore,
the owner of the liquor license could theoretically open an establishment at any time in
the future.
Councilmember Clark asked if a hearing would be required should the present
owner decide to reestablish the Series 6 license. Mr. Bailey responded no.
Mayor Scruggs assured Phoenix residents that all of the letters the Council
received were taken very seriously.
14
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item Numbers 7.
Ms. Jamie Johnson, a resident of the City of Phoenix and President of the Sevilla
Neighborhood Association, stated the Association's mission is to improve the quality of
life and property values in the community. She said the southwest quarter mile has
been in the top 100 highest crime grids in the City of Phoenix for a long time, with a lot
of criminal activity on both sides of the Phoenix/Glendale border. She expressed her
opinion liquor licenses should be avoided in high risk areas as they can attract
additional problems.
Ms. Vivian B. Valle, a resident of the City of Phoenix, on behalf of the Sevilla
Neighborhood Association, said, in her opinion, the boundary between Phoenix and
Glendale does not exist. She stated they were happy when the previous establishment
closed. She explained they have tried for many years to reinvigorate the area and have
been very active against new liquor license applications. She said the proposed
establishment will be in a strip mall that has been unable to sustain any business and
another liquor license application has been submitted for another establishment in the
same center. She read excerpts from a letter she received from Mr. Van Winkle, which
indicates the business will be run, and eventually owned by the applicant's brother-in-
law. She asked why the applicant's brother-in-law is not the applicant. She asked who
will manage the establishment when the brother-in-law is not available. She said the
area will be ripe for improvement once the Grand Avenue overpass is completed and
the proposed liquor license will not benefit the community. She said she cannot believe
the Police Department is not aware of problems with transients in the area, stating she
sees them at all hours of the day and night. She asked the Council to deny the
application.
Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing on this item.
Mr. Van Winkle, Applicant, assured the Council that his brother-in-law received
the appropriate training. He said, however, if it would alleviate concerns on the part of
residents and the Council, he and his wife are willing to attend the training as well.
Mayor Scruggs asked if the previous tenant is still renting the space. Mr. Van
Winkle responded no, explaining they have already signed a lease with the landlord,
but have not yet started operating. Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Van Winkle what
prompted them to choose the subject location, given the difficulty people will have
accessing it once the Grand Avenue improvements are completed. Mr. Van Winkle
stated their bar will cater to people of different languages, including Korean's, Chinese
and Japanese. He said his brother-in-law found and recommended the subject
location. Mayor Scruggs asked the applicant if they have ever owned or operated a
business that required a liquor license. Mr. Van Winkle stated he is a software
developer and is learning the bar business. He said, however, his wife and brother-in-
law have worked in the restaurant business for over five years. Mayor Scruggs asked
Mr. Van Winkle if he was aware that the neighborhood association would like to have
15
met with them before the case came to City Council. Mr. Van Winkle said he drafted a
response to letters he received last week and would like to meet with the residents to
address their concerns. Mayor Scruggs asked how much time does the applicant have
left in the application cycle. Mr. Bailey said the 60 days expire on November 29.
Councilmember Goulet asked Mr. Van Winkle if he did an evaluation of the
surrounding area to determine the number of existing liquor licenses. Mr. Van Winkle
responded yes, stating you have to identify the number of licenses within a half-mile
radius when submitting a transfer to the State Liquor Board. Councilmember Goulet
asked the applicant for a compelling reason as to why his application should be
approved. Mr. Van Winkle said multi-language karaoke is unique to the area and a
number of people have indicated their desire for such an establishment.
Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Van Winkle when he filed his application with
the City of Glendale. Mr. Bailey explained that when the application was initially filed a
church was located in the strip mall. He said the applicant was advised of the church
and the applicant requested a continuance. He stated the church is no longer present
and the applicant is free to proceed. Councilmember Clark asked why the case did not
proceed to Council at the end of October if the posting occurred in mid-October. Mr.
Bailey said the application did not come to Council until now because of the concerns
with the church and the fact that Council only hears liquor license applications at one
meeting per month.
Councilmember Frate asked Mr. Van Winkle if he would be willing to be more
involved in the business if it would help alleviate residents' concerns. Mr. Van Winkle
responded yes, stating he would also like to open the lines of communication between
he and the residents.
Councilmember Martinez asked if the item could be tabled until the Council's
December 16 meeting. Mr. Bailey explained the state requires that the city handle
liquor license applications within 60 days, therefore, the city does not have the ability to
table the application. He said, should the city fail to take action on the application, the
state will treat the city's inaction on the item as a non-decision and hear it on their
agenda.
In response to Councilmember Clark's question, Mr. Bailey said, in general, an
application presented to the state without a recommendation is placed on their consent
agenda. He noted, however, the city would have the ability to send a representative to
the hearing.
Mr. Bailey clarified for Mayor Scruggs that the second liquor establishment in the
center will be applying for a Series 10 liquor license in December. He stated the license
will be a new license in the area.
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Martinez, to forward Liquor
License Applications No. 3-902 for Po Jang Ma Cha, to the State of Arizona
16
Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, with the recommendation for
approval.
Councilmember Martinez suggested they add a stipulation that the owners
attend the required training. Mr. Bailey said the Council's recommendation is typically
one of approval or denial. He said, by law, the Liquor Board could not impose the
additional stipulation as long as the manager has the proper training.
Councilmember Clark pointed out the Liquor Board typically reads the minutes of
the Council hearing when a recommendation for denial is made. She said she will not
support the license because of the neighborhood's demographics and high crime. She
stated the applicant has not demonstrated the need for another liquor license and the
residents have demonstrated that no such need exists.
Councilmember Goulet said he spent the last two Saturdays at the Police
Department on a DUI sweep and police officers identified the area south of Glendale
Avenue as the highest problem area. He commended Mr. Van Winkle on his
willingness to attend the training, stating, however, he does not believe a need exists.
Vice Mayor Eggleston said he will not support the application because of the
strong neighborhood opposition.
Councilmember Martinez empathized with residents of the neighborhood,
stating, however, the location has been a bar for a long time. He said the proposed
license will be less intense than the one that already exists, therefore, he will support
the application.
Councilmember Frate stated he listens carefully to residents who come before
Council and, given the residents' strong opposition, he will not support the application.
He pointed out, however, the applicant has the right to appeal to the state if Council
ultimately denies the application.
Mayor Scruggs commented that Council's position is in no way a reflection on
the applicant or the proposed business, explaining their concerns are based on the
location. She said the current owner may not be interested in being in the business any
longer and may be willing to sell their liquor license. She encouraged Mr. Van Winkle to
look for another location.
Upon a call for the question, the motion failed by a vote of 1 to 5, with the
following Councilmembers voting "aye": Martinez. Councilmembers voting
"nay": Clark, Frate Goulet, Lieberman, Frate, and Scruggs.
PUBLIC HEARING — LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
15. REZONING APPLICATION ZON-03-05: TARRINGTON PLACE — 6301 WEST
ALICE AVENUE
17
Mr. John Verdugo, Planner, presented this item.
This is a request by Earl, Curley and Lagarde, P.C. on behalf of KB Home
Phoenix, Inc. for City Council to approve Rezoning Application ZON-03-05, Tarrington
Place, located at 6301 West Alice Avenue. The applicant requests rezoning from R-2
PRD (Mixed Residence, Planned Residential Development) to R1-4 PRD (Single
Residence, Planned Residential Development).
The proposed development plan is consistent with the General Plan and the R1-
4 PRD adds to the city's housing stock, provides a range of housing opportunities and
housing unit diversity. This development incorporates sound growth management
techniques by utilizing the surrounding infrastructure.
The site is located on the south side of Alice Avenue and on the west side of 63rd
Avenue. The development plan includes 192 single-family lots on 31.48 acres at a
gross density of 6.1 dwelling units per acre. Lots vary in size from 3,415 square feet to
7,454 square feet. The proposed minimum lot width is 39 feet and the proposed
minimum lot depth is 80 feet. This request meets the requirements of the Single Family
Residential Design Guidelines and Minor Lot Division Ordinance.
On October 2, 2003, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
rezoning application with eight stipulations.
The project promotes the development of vacant property and provides housing
that is compatible with the surrounding area. In addition, the development will help
complete the full width of the existing scalloped streets adjacent to the property.
On June 18, 2003, the applicant held a neighborhood meeting. Of the 217
people invited to the meeting, ten area residents attended. Issues discussed included
location of two-story homes, status and location of the proposed five-acre park, use of
internal trail system, perimeter maintenance and traffic impacts.
The recommendation was to approve rezoning application ZON-03-05 subject to
the eight stipulations as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Verdugo confirmed for Councilmember Martinez that the project is
considered an infill project. Councilmember Martinez asked about the deviations from
the city's guidelines. Mr. Verdugo explained certain accommodations were required to
make the project and house product work. He confirmed the homes will all be two
story.
Councilmember Clark asked what qualifies the 39 acre parcel as infill. Mr.
Verdugo said its proximity to the center of the city makes it an infill parcel. He
confirmed the parcel is located in the city's designated redevelopment area.
Councilmember Clark asked what standard features will be offered with the proposed
18
house product. Mr. Verdugo said all units will have architecturally integrated patio
covers. He said the city will have control over perimeter landscaping, common open
areas and the five foot track between the street and sidewalks. Councilmember Clark
pointed out the project has a lot of straight streets. Mr. Verdugo said staff struggled
with the street layouts, however, they were limited by drainage issues and the sewer
system. Councilmember Clark expressed her opinion the guidelines were decimated,
asking how they got from 0 and 10 feet side yard setbacks to 5 and 5. Mr. Verdugo
explained the applicant felt the proposed side yard setbacks would work best with their
product. He pointed out each lot is still separated by 10 feet. Councilmember Clark
asked what reason did the applicant give when asking for 50 percent lot coverage. Mr.
Verdugo said the applicant originally proposed to have the patio covers be optional. He
stated the city ultimately required that the patio covers not be optional, consequently,
the lot coverage increased.
Councilmember Goulet asked about the visual impact of the project as compared
to the project to the north. Mr. Verdugo said the project to the north has standard lots
with one and two story homes, however, it does not have open common space. He
noted no residents of the subdivision to the north have contacted the city in opposition
to the proposed project.
Mr. Verdugo confirmed for Vice Mayor Eggleston that the streets are public
streets and will be built to city standards.
Mr. Mike Curley, Applicant's representative, explained R2 is the only zoning that
can accommodate the General Plan density of 5 to 8 units per acre. He said the design
guidelines are not intended for small lots, therefore, they had to request deviations with
regard to the side yard setbacks and the setback to the front garage. He discussed the
layout of the homes and common space, expressing his opinion the project represents
a major upgrade in terms of aesthetics. He said the Planning Commission and
surrounding residents support the project. He stated the homes will be the largest in
the area and the project constitutes a down zoning, noting the property owner received
another offer to develop the site at 12 units per acre.
Councilmember Clark asked if the proposed project is equivalent to La Paloma.
Mr. Curley said, from an architectural standpoint, the proposed project is significantly
better than La Paloma.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 15.
Ms. Vicki McAllister, a resident of the City of Glendale, stated she is speaking on
behalf of the Glencroft Retirement Community. She said their CEO is very familiar with
the proposed project and senior staff members have reviewed the lot configuration,
floor plans and community amenities. She stated Glencroft is recommending that the
property in question be rezoned to allow the development to move forward. She
expressed their opinion that the new development will enhance the neighborhood and
19
compliment the surrounding area. She said they are very opposed to developing the
property for town homes or other multi-family configuration.
Ms. Ila Oaks, a resident of the City of Glendale Ocotillo District, stated she
supports the proposed rezoning, expressing her opinion single family housing will be
much better for the neighborhood.
Mr. Jim Grantham, a resident of the City of Glendale Ocotillo District, voiced his
support for the proposed rezoning.
Ms. Kay Blackman, President, Glencroft Residents Association, submitted
petitions in support of the proposed rezoning. He said they believe the proposed
project will provide a more stable family population and increase the value of
neighborhood properties, while the parks and open spaces will benefit the community.
Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to approve rezoning
application, ZON-03-05.
Councilmember Goulet thanked the applicant for their willingness to meet with
the neighborhood. He expressed his opinion the project will greatly benefit the
community.
Upon a call for the question, the motion carried unanimously.
ORDINANCES
16. AIRPORT TERMINAL LEASES WITH MAKARION ENTERPRISES, INC.
Mr. Mark Ripley, Airport Manager, presented this item.
This is a request for City Council to approve two leases with Makarion
Enterprises for suites 100 and 200, in the airport terminal building.
A Council strategic priority is to promote economic development. Makarion
Enterprises has purchased the Global Group and continues to operate a medium size
flight training school at the airport. This purchase has preserved jobs at the Glendale
Airport that would have been lost had the Global Group simply closed their doors.
The Global Group has been operating several aviation related companies at the
airport for approximately six years. The largest of these companies was the flight
school operation. Over the past 12 months, the Global Group had been downsizing
and at the end of August 2003, they relocated to Ryan Field in Tucson under a new
name.
20
Makarion Enterprises has operated a large flight school since 1999 in Chino,
California. Approximately nine months ago, Makarion Enterprises purchased a
percentage of the Global Group and then in August 2003 they purchased the remaining
portion and continued the flight training operations at the Glendale Airport. This was
very beneficial in that the current Global flight students can complete their flight training
and future students will have a choice of flight schools at the airport. The proposed use
does not conflict with the 1998 Airport Master Plan or the 1994 Part 150 Noise Study.
The term for both office leases will be for one year, with four one-year options.
To activate an option, the tenant must provide written notice to the airport manager 90
days prior to the expiration of the current term.
The annual rent for suite 100 will be $13,433.23 for the first year and the annual
rent for suite 200 will be $12,947.62 for the first year.
There will be a Consumer Price Index adjustment at the end of each year during
the full term of these leases.
Both leases utilize the new terminal rates approved by Council in January 2003.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance authorizing the leasing of suites 100 and 200 to Makarion Enterprises at the
Glendale Municipal Airport.
Mr. Ripley confirmed for Councilmember Frate that the same type of aircraft will
be used. He said Makarion has six aircraft at the airport, whereas Global had fourteen
before they left.
Councilmember Clark pointed out one of the major issues when they reviewed
the Airport Master Plan was the noise generated by the flight training aircraft. She
noted the city actually discouraged flight training at the airport and, although Global
continued to conduct training, they diminished their operation. She asked what has
changed that the city would now encourage flight training. She also asked if there will
be restrictions with regard to the types of aircraft and hours of operation. She further
asked what will be done to protect Camelback Farms, Villa de Paz and Glen Lakes. Mr.
Ripley said the 1994 study dealt with Lufthansa who flew Beachcraft Bonanza Aircraft,
whereas Makarion uses Piper and Cessna aircraft, which are considerably quieter. He
stated, additionally, they encourage the flight schools not to conduct touch-and-go's
and touch-and-go's are prohibited between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Councilmember
Clark asked about the time period for each lease. Mr. Ripley stated the leases have an
original term of one year, with four one year options. He noted the aircraft seem to be
flying higher over the residential areas because of the lengthened runway.
Ordinance No. 2351 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 AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND/OR CITY
21
MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AIRPORT TERMINAL LEASE
AGREEMENTS WITH MAKARION ENTERPRISES, INC. FOR CERTAIN OFFICE
SPACE IN THE TERMINAL BUILDING AT THE GLENDALE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Martinez, to approve Ordinance
No. 2351 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez,
Frate, and Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
17. AIRPORT TERMINAL LEASE WITH PREMIER COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT,
INC.
Mr. Mark Ripley, Airport Manager, presented this item.
This is a request for City Council to approve a lease with Premier Community
Management for Suite 206 B in the Glendale Municipal Airport terminal building.
One of Council's strategic priorities is to promote economic development and
provide financial stability. Premier Community Management is a residential community
management company located in the East Valley. They are expanding to the West
Valley and desire to open a satellite office. This growing company will create new jobs
and generate revenue at the airport.
Premier Community Management, Inc. is a residential community management
company located in Chandler. They have recently obtained contracts with communities
in the West Valley that require that they have a satellite office. They desire to be at the
airport because it is a recognized landmark; it has excellent freeway access, and offers
superior office facilities.
The term of the office lease will be for one year, with four one-year renewal
options. The tenant must provide written notice to the airport manager 90 days prior to
the expiration of the current term to renew.
The annual rent for suite 206 B will be $4,436.25 for the first year. There will be
a Consumer Price Index adjustment on the anniversary date prior to the lease renewal.
This is the first lease agreement that utilizes the new non-aviation terminal rate
approved by Council in January 2003. The non-aviation rate is $17.50 per square foot.
On November 12, 2003, the Aviation Advisory Commission reviewed and voted
unanimously to support the request by Premier Community Management to lease office
space in the airport terminal building.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance authorizing the lease of Suite 206 D to Premier Community Management,
Inc. at the Glendale Municipal Airport.
22
Ordinance No. 2352 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 AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND/OR CITY
MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AIRPORT TERMINAL LEASE
AGREEMENT WITH PREMIER COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT, INC. FOR CERTAIN
OFFICE SPACE IN THE TERMINAL BUILDING AT THE GLENDALE MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT
It was moved by Lieberman, and seconded by Frate, to approve Ordinance
No. 2352 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez,
Frate, and Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
18. AIRPORT TERMINAL LEASE WITH FIREBIRD FLIGHT TRAINING CENTER,
LLC.
Mr. Mark Ripley, Airport Manager, presented this item.
This is a request for the City Council to approve a lease with Firebird Flight
Training Center for Suite 206 D in the airport terminal building.
One of Council's strategic priorities is to promote economic development.
Firebird Flight Training Center is a small business that will create several new jobs at
the airport.
Klobe Air has been performing aircraft maintenance at the airport for several
months and as a natural extension of the maintenance operation, has started a small
flight school operating as Firebird Flight Training Center, LLC. The proposed use does
not conflict with the 1998 Airport Master Plan.
The term of the office lease will be for one year, with four (4) one-year renewal
options. The tenant must provide written notice to the airport manager 90 days prior to
the expiration of the current term to renew.
The annual rent for Suite 206 D will be $3,929.25 for the first year. There will be
a Consumer Price Index adjustment at the end of each year prior to the lease renewal.
This is the first lease agreement that uses the new terminal rates approved by
Council in January 2003.
On August 13, 2002, the Aviation Advisory Commission reviewed and voted
unanimously to support the request by Firebird Flight Training Center to lease office
space in the airport terminal building.
23
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance authorizing the lease of Suite 206 D to Firebird Flight Training Center, LLC at
the Glendale Municipal Airport.
Councilmember Clark asked what kind of aircraft will be used. Mr. Ripley said
the school will use three Cessna planes. He pointed out the total number of planes for
both schools is still considerably less than the number of planes used by Global.
Mr. Ripley confirmed for Councilmember Lieberman that the schools will not
conduct maintenance on their own aircraft.
Councilmember Martinez asked if there is a limit on the number of planes the
school can have. Mr. Ripley said the school currently has three aircraft and they do not
anticipate having more than four aircraft. He stated, however, there is no language in
the lease concerning the number of aircraft.
Ordinance No. 2353 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 AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR AND/OR CITY
MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AIRPORT TERMINAL LEASE
AGREEMENT WITH FIREBIRD FLIGHT TRAINING CENTER, L.L.C. FOR CERTAIN
OFFICE SPACE IN THE TERMINAL BUILDING AT THE GLENDALE MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT
It was moved by Lieberman, and seconded by Clark, to approve Ordinance
No. 2353 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez,
Frate, and Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
19. LICENSING REVISIONS TO GLENDALE CITY CODES CHAPTER 5 AND
CHAPTER 21
Mr. Art Lynch, Chief Financial Officer, presented this item.
This is a request by the Sales Tax and Licensing Division for the City Council to
amend Chapter 5 (Amusements) and Chapter 21 (Licensing, Taxation and
Miscellaneous Business Regulations).
Under the current code, each hockey game, lacrosse game, football game, will
be required to obtain an exhibition license for each game. The proposed changes will
eliminate this requirement.
This request will eliminate redundancies in the licensing process and promote
economic development through a more efficient licensing process.
24
Glendale City Code Chapters 5 and 21 address special regulatory licensing in
the City of Glendale. These chapters address animal-drawn carriages, arcades,
carnivals, circuses, entertainment facilities, exhibitions, haunted houses, kiddie rides,
race tracks, shooting galleries, wagering establishments, auctioneers, consignment
dealers, fortune tellers, herb dealers, junk dealers, pawnshops, peddlers and
secondhand dealers and the licenses that are required to conduct these activities.
The City is anticipating future sporting and entertainment events of a magnitude
not addressed in the current code. The proposed amendments will create a more
efficient process and reduce redundancies in the special regulatory process. The
proposed changes include amendments to the amusement license process and the
seasonal peddlers license process. However, none of the proposed changes involve
eliminating the remittance of sales tax.
Chapter 5 and Chapter 21 were last amended in 1997.
The changes eliminate redundancies in the license process and create a more
efficient process. The streamlined process will facilitate the holding of events that were
not foreseen at the adoption of the code.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
Ordinance amending Chapter 5 and Chapter 21 of the Glendale City Code.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if sports venues will have to get a license once
a year. Mr. Lynch stated the venues will be subject to the same annual licensing
requirements, but not on a per-instance basis. He pointed out the amended
requirements would apply to only those events held on local county, city or other quasi-
governmental property.
Councilmember Clark asked what is the cost of an annual license. Mr. Drake
explained a privileged sales tax license would be required and would cost $50.
Mayor Scruggs asked if the license is specific to the activity. Mr. Lynch
responded yes. Mayor Scruggs expressed concern about exempting all non-profit
businesses. Mr. Lynch noted businesses will go through a lengthy approval process.
He clarified the modification would not eliminate the requirement for special events
approval or tax and license review. Mayor Scruggs asked what events the city
envisions coming to the Arena that necessitates the proposed change to the licensing
code. Mr. Lynch explained, under the current code, each hockey game would require a
separate license. He said the proposed change would allow recurring events to obtain
a single license. He pointed out that how events at the major facilities will be conducted
is covered under the respective Development Agreements.
Councilmember Clark expressed concern about having one $50 license covering
an unlimited number of events. Mr. Lynch pointed out the city will be in the position of
reviewing and approving all of the events. Councilmember Clark suggested they create
25
a new classification and fee structure for the sporting venues rather than modifying the
existing classification. Mr. Lynch explained the annual license is for the sales tax
license only. He said all events and activities will still be taxed under the code.
In response to Councilmember Martinez's question, Mr. Lynch explained the
license fee would cover all events, regardless of the activities involved. Councilmember
Martinez expressed his opinion the proposed modification is too liberal.
Councilmember Clark expressed her opinion the proposed modification is
inappropriate.
Ordinance No. 2354 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 GLENDALE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 5,
ARTICLE I BY ADDING A NEW SEC. 5-13 EXEMPTING CERTAIN FACILITIES AND
ACTIVITIES FROM AMUSEMENT LICENSING REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING
CHAPTER 21, ARTICLE I, BY AMENDING THE DEFINITION FOR "PEDDLER OR
SOLICITOR" AND ADDING A NEW SEC. 21-28 EXEMPTING CERTAIN FACILITIES
AND ACTIVITIES FROM SPECIAL REGULATORY LICENSING REQUIREMENTS;
AND SETTING FORTH AN EFFECTIVE DATE
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Goulet, to approve Ordinance No.
2354 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Goulet, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and Scruggs.
Members voting "nay": Clark and Lieberman.
20. DEEDS AND EASEMENT ORDINANCE
Mr. Larry Broyles, City Engineer, presented this item.
This is a request for City Council to accept real estate properties conveyed by
quit-claim deed, warranty deed and/or easements from property owners, pursuant to
Article VII, Sec. 15 of the City Charter.
One of the City Council strategic priorities is managing growth and preserving
neighborhoods. The Deeds and Easement Ordinance conveys properties necessary to
complete municipal objectives.
The Deeds and Easement Ordinance is compiled of recently conveyed
properties. 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 Council adopt an ordinance dedicating
these properties for public use.
It is to the advantage of the City of Glendale to dedicate the described properties
for public use. Glendale citizens directly benefit from the city's ownership of properties
utilized for public amenities.
26
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance dedicating certain real property for public use.
Ordinance No. 2355 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 Goulet, and seconded by Frate, to approve Ordinance No.
2355 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez,
Frate, and Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTION
21. HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN
Mr. Ron Short, Long Range Planning Manager, presented this item.
This is a request for City Council to conduct a public hearing and approve the
resolution adopting the updated Glendale Historic Preservation Plan (GHPP).
Purpose of the GHPP is to outline an active historic preservation process and
identify and prioritize key areas for preservation. The anticipated outcome will be
increased preservation of Glendale's historic resources.
The GHPP will address the Council's strategic priority of managing growth and
preserving neighborhoods and help to implement both the Glendale General Plan
Redevelopment Element and City Center Master Plan.
The Glendale Historic Preservation Commission initiated the GHPP in late 2002
with the help of a Federal Historic Preservation Fund matching grant. The Commission,
consultants, and planning staff developed and executed a historic preservation survey
sent to 1,000 residents. Three hundred completed questionnaires were received. Two
focus group meetings were held. Survey results indicated challenges confronting
historic preservation and establishes priorities for preserving historic resources. The
Commission recommended the proposed GHPP for approval to the City Council at the
July 24, 2003 meeting.
On November 4, 2003, Council reviewed the GHPP at their workshop.
The GHPP will help to improve the Commission and staff capacity, public
awareness, active designation of historic resources to the local, state, and national
27
register of historic places and develop incentives for preservation. The advancement of
the Glendale Historic Preservation program will help to further the creation of a "sense
of place" for the City of Glendale.
The Historic Preservation Commission approved a Citizen Participation Plan and
Final Citizen Participation Report. An extensive mail-out survey was conducted for
targeted groups followed up by two focus group meetings. The Commission was
provided monthly status reports and the city web site informed citizens of meetings.
The July 24, 2003 Historic Preservation Commission meeting was advertised as a
public hearing in the Glendale Star.
The cost for updating the GHPP is $20,000. Funds are available in the GHPP
account and through the State Historic Preservation Office using Federal Historic
Preservation Fund Pass-Through Grant.
Grants Capital One-Time Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
Expense Cost
10,000 X 10,000 X 20,000
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number:
Glendale Historic Preservation Plan Account No. 47-7686-7330.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution
approving the updated GHPP.
Resolution No. 3717 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA
COUNTY, ARIZONA, ADOPTING THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN FOR THE
CITY OF GLENDALE, ARIZONA
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 21.
Mr. Carl Jordan, Vice Chairperson of the Historic Preservation Commission,
recommended approval of the Historic Preservation Plan.
Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Goulet, to pass, adopt and
approve Resolution No. 3717 New Series. The motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION
22. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR AN INTELLIGENT
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MASTER PLAN FOR THE SPORTS
FACILITIES AREA
28
Ms. Debbie Burdette, Associate Traffic Engineer, presented this item.
This is a request for City Council to approve an intergovernmental agreement
(IGA) with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) for use of Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding in the development of an Intelligent
Transportation Systems (ITS) Master Plan for the sports facilities area. This plan will
serve as the roadmap for development and implementation strategies of ITS projects
on site as well as in the surrounding community.
This project will help the city in meeting the Council strategic priorities of
projecting a positive image of Glendale, promoting economic development, leveraging
technology for efficiency and convenience, managing growth and preserving
neighborhoods, and enhancing the quality of life for Glendale residents. Effectively
managing event traffic is paramount to the success of the sports facilities and
surrounding business and commercial areas. A comprehensive plan to link this area
into the traffic signal system and to use state-of-the-art traffic management technology
to guide and facilitate traffic to and from events will reduce congestion in the area.
A request for Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) to perform ITS on-call services
was sent to 14 engineering firms on the city's pre-qualified list and public
announcements were made in the Glendale Star on June 19, 2003, and the East Valley
Tribune on June 19 and 26, 2003. Six SOQs were received and a team of five city
employees evaluated the SOQs. Based on the evaluation of the SOQs and panel
interviews, ITS Engineers & Constructors was selected as the top firm.
This project will provide the foundation for facilitating event traffic, enabling the
city to provide a positive experience for residents and visitors traveling to and from the
arena and stadium as well as local traffic.
Managing traffic in and around the sports facilities has been the topic of
discussion at several Yucca District meetings as well as six special neighborhood
meetings held between July 2002 and May 2003.
The consultant fee for development of an ITS Master Plan for the Coyotes
Arena/Cardinals Stadium area is $209,934. ADOT project administration is $5,000;
therefore, the total project cost is $214,934. Funds in the amount of $190,000 for this
project are available through a Federal CMAQ grant, and will be reimbursed to the city
based on this Intergovernmental Agreement. The city's required contribution for
matching funds is $24,934, and is budgeted in the Glendale Onboard (GO!)
Transportation Program.
29
Grants Capital One-Time Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
Expense Cost _
$190,000 $24,934 X $214,934
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number:
Smart Traffic Signal Equipment Account No: 25-9469-8330
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 Intergovernmental Agreement.
Resolution No. 3718 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 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY'S SPORTS
FACILITIES DISTRICT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM (ITS)
PLANNING STUDY
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Frate, to pass, adopt and approve
Resolution No. 3718 New Series. The motion carried unanimously.
BIDS AND CONTRACTS
23. INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MASTER PLAN FOR THE
SPORTS FACILITIES AREA
Ms. Debbie Burdett, Associate Traffic Engineer, presented this item.
This is a request for the City Council to approve a professional services
agreement with ITS Engineers & Constructors, Inc., in an amount not to exceed
$209,934 for the development of an Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Master
Plan for the sports facilities area. This plan will serve as the roadmap for development
and implementation strategies of ITS projects on site as well as in the surrounding
community.
This project will help the city in meeting the Council strategic priorities of
projecting a positive image of Glendale, promoting economic development, leveraging
technology for efficiency and convenience, managing growth and preserving
neighborhoods, and enhancing the quality of life for Glendale residents. Effectively
managing event traffic is paramount to the success of the sports facilities and
surrounding business and commercial areas. A comprehensive plan to link this area
into the traffic signal system and to use state-of-the-art traffic management technology
to guide and facilitate traffic to and from events will reduce congestion in the area.
30
A request for Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) to perform ITS on-call services
was sent to 14 engineering firms on the city's pre-qualified list and public
announcements were made in the Glendale Star on June 19, 2003, and the East Valley
Tribune on June 19 and 26, 2003. Six SOQs were received and a team of five city
employees evaluated the SOQs. Based on the evaluation of the SOQs and panel
interviews, ITS Engineers & Constructors was selected as the top firm. A summary of
the rankings is attached.
This project will provide the foundation for facilitating event traffic, enabling the
city to provide a positive experience for residents and visitors traveling to and from the
arena and stadium as well as local traffic.
Managing traffic in and around the sports facilities has been the topic of
discussion at several Yucca District meetings as well as six special neighborhood
meetings held between July 2002 and May 2003.
The fee for development of an ITS Master Plan for the Coyotes Arena/Cardinals
Stadium area is $209,934. Funds in the amount of $190,000 for this project are
available through a Federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grant, and
will be reimbursed to the city based on an intergovernmental agreement. The city's
required contribution for matching funds is $19,934, and is budgeted in the Glendale
Onboard (GO!) Transportation Program.
Grants Capital One-Time Cost Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
Expense
$190,000 $19,934 X $209,934
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number:
Smart Traffic Signal Equipment Account No: 25-9469-8330
The recommendation was to approve the professional services agreement with
ITS Engineers & Constructors, Inc., in the amount of $209,934.
It was moved by Frate and seconded by Lieberman to approve the
recommended actions on item No. 23. The motion carried unanimously
(Councilmember Clark not present during vote).
NEW BUSINESS
24. GLENDALE ONBOARD (GO!) TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM: 2003 ANNUAL
REPORT AND FY 2004-2028 PROGRAM OF PROJECTS
Mr. Terry Johnson, Transportation Planning Manager, presented this item.
31
This is a request for City Council to approve the 2003 Glendale Onboard (GO!)
Transportation Program Annual Report and FY 2004-2028 Program of projects. This is
the second Annual Report and 25-year Program of projects since the voters of
Glendale approved a half-cent sales tax for transportation purposes on November 6,
2001.
One of the Council's strategic priorities is to improve transportation options.
When voters passed a half-cent sales tax increase in November 2001 to support
transportation projects, staff began to implement the Glendale Onboard (GO!)
Transportation Program. In order to ensure the delivery of proposed transportation
projects as presented to the voters, a commitment was made to issue an annual report
and 25-year program of projects.
On November 6, 2001 the voters of Glendale approved a half-cent sales tax for
transportation purposes. Since that time, transit service has been expanded resulting in
a 35% increase in ridership. Ongoing programs including traffic mitigation in
neighborhoods, traffic education programs, and bicycle programs have been expanded.
Design concepts for street projects are nearing completion and construction has been
completed on some projects.
This year's program focuses on incorporating design concept information,
detailing specific street construction projects, and incorporating a more accurate
estimate of costs. The 25-year program totals $903 million in projects and is financially
balanced. All commitments to voters are being met.
In March 2003, Council approved the 2002 Annual Report and FY 2003-2027
Program of projects.
In February 2002, Council approved a Citizens Transportation Oversight
Commission (CTOC) to oversee the Glendale Onboard (GO!) Transportation Program.
Council then awarded a contract to URS Corporation to proceed with General
Engineering Services for the Glendale Onboard (GO!) Transportation Program.
Following the November 2001 transportation election, Council directed staff to
begin implementation of the Glendale Onboard (GO!) Transportation Program.
In November 2001, Glendale residents overwhelmingly approved the Glendale
Onboard (GO!) Transportation Program. This program will accomplish improved traffic
flow, relieve traffic congestion, increase transportation options, improve air quality,
promote economic vitality, and provide regional transportation connections.
On November 6, 2003, the Citizens Transportation Oversight Commission
unanimously recommended approval of the 2003 Glendale Onboard (GO!)
Transportation Program Annual Report and FY 2004-2028 Program of projects.
32
The recommendation was to approve the 2003 Glendale Onboard (GO!)
Transportation Program Annual Report and FY 2004-2028 Program of projects.
Councilmember Martinez referred to Page 14 of the document, asking why the
service extensions are going to be phased in more slowly than assumed in pre-election
calculations. Mr. Johnson explained the revenue projections were higher prior to the
election and, in order to balance the program financially, they will delay implementation
of some of the bus service. He pointed out the city is on target with its commitment to
the voters to extend service after five years, but before 25 years.
In response to Vice Mayor Eggleston's question, Mr. Johnson said a number of
intersection improvements will be made along 43rd Avenue.
Mayor Scruggs referred to the last paragraph on Page 13, asking if the city has
taken the Glendale Citizens Bond Committee's recommendation for $240 million in
transportation bonds to the voters. Mr. Johnson responded no, explaining the funds will
not be needed until FY 2005. Mayor Scruggs asked if it will come forward for the May
2004 election. Mr. Ernster said an interdepartmental committee is meeting to discuss
the need for a bond election for both transportation and water and sewer projects. He
stated they are studying different alternatives and will come to Council with
recommendations within the next couple months.
Councilmember Clark asked if General Obligation Bonds reduces the city's
ability to issue General Obligation Bonds for other projects. Mr. Lynch responded yes.
He explained staff will look at various financial instruments to determine if there is a
substantial benefit to issuing General Obligation Bonds.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if the program relies on a certain amount of
state or federal funding. Mr. Johnson said one-third of the funding will come from
federal, state and regional funding sources.
It was moved by Clark and seconded by Martinez to approve the
recommended actions on item No. 24. The motion carried unanimously.
25. 63RD AVENUE/LOOP 101 BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
Mr. James Book, Transportation Director, presented this item.
This is a request for City Council to approve the design concept for a proposed
bicycle/pedestrian bridge over Loop 101 at 63rd Avenue as currently programmed for
funding in the Glendale Onboard (GO) Transportation Program.
The Council values public safety, transportation options, and enhancements to
the quality of life for Glendale residents. This proposed bicycle/pedestrian bridge would
provide safe access over Loop 101, a transportation option for bicyclists and
pedestrians, and an important link in the City of Glendale's bicycle system.
33
In November 2001, Glendale voters approved the half-cent transportation sales
tax package including a ballot map of bicycle and pedestrian projects which identified a
crossing of Loop 101 at 63rd Avenue. There is an immediate need for the
bicycle/pedestrian bridge to be designed in coordination with the city's sound wall
project along this section of Loop 101 in order to avoid the need to reconstruct portions
of the sound walls to accommodate the bicycle project.
Numerous alternative design concepts were considered for this project. Actions
by the Bicycle Advisory Committee and by the Citizens Transportation Oversight
Commission recommend a low profile concept on the 63rd Avenue alignment as being
least disruptive to neighborhoods while fully meeting the needs of bicyclists and
pedestrians. The bridge over Loop 101 would be at-grade and staff is recommending
the bridge concept rather than a tunnel under the frontage roads. The bridge concept
would feel safer because of its more open design, it would be lighted, and it would be
monitored with closed circuit surveillance cameras.
The Citizens Transportation Oversight Commission (CTOC) took actions
regarding design alternatives for this bridge at their March 6, 2003, September 4, 2003
and November 6, 2003 meetings, recommending the lower elevation alternative for the
bridge over Loop 101 and either a tunnel option or a bridge option under the frontage
roads as part of the design of this project.
The proposed crossing would provide a safe route over Loop 101 for adults and
children who currently must use busy arterial street crossings. The crossing would also
provide a critical link to expand the continuity of the city's bicycle system.
Glendale residents attended public meetings held in three areas of the city in
2002 and 2003 to review and comment on all GO Program projects. Public notice of
meetings included mailings to all city households and notices in local newspapers.
Meetings were well attended and citizens provided comments regarding the design and
location of the proposed bicycle/pedestrian bridge.
On February 27, 2003, a public meeting was held at the Foothills Public Library
for the public to review two proposed design options for the proposed bicycle/pedestrian
bridge. Approximately 25 Glendale residents attended and provided responses to
survey questions regarding the proposed project.
On July 9, 2003, city transportation staff met with approximately 15 residents of
the Enclave neighborhood located near the project site to discuss design options for the
proposed bridge. Comments by the residents have been taken into consideration in the
design of this project.
At the September 4, 2003 CTOC meeting, approximately 15 representatives
from the Glendale Bicycle Advisory Committee and two regional bicycle clubs
expressed their support for this project.
34
The recommendation was to approve the design concept for a bridge under the
Loop 101 frontage roads as part of a proposed bicycle/pedestrian bridge over Loop 101
at 63rd Avenue.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Item 25.
Mr. Joe Terranova, a resident of the City of Glendale Cholla District, noted he
sits on the Citizens Bicycle Advisory Committee. He said without the proposed bridge,
the only bicycle friendly crossings over the 101 are located at 27th Avenue and 99th
Avenue. He said the bridge will help encourage the use of bicycles as a primary form of
transportation.
Mr. Rich Rumer, President, State Bicycle Coalition, noted his organization
represents approximately 5,000 cyclists in the Maricopa County area. He voiced his
support of the 63rd Avenue/Loop 101 bicycle bridge. He said they also support the
Glendale Bicycle Advisory Committee's recommendation to approve the plan. He
stated the bridge will connect bicycle lanes, connect neighborhoods and parks, provide
children with safe routes to school and provide seniors with easy access to shopping.
He said bicycle paths also increase property values, enhance the quality of life, improve
air quality and improves a community's overall physical health.
Ms. Betsy Turner, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District, stated she
also serves on the Glendale Bicycle Advisory Committee. She voiced her opinion the
bridge will benefit the cycling and pedestrian community in Glendale. She said the
bridge will provide north/south connectivity and the well designed facility will enhance
the neighborhood.
Ms. Gail Terranova, a resident of the City of Glendale Cholla District, urged the
Council to support the bridge.
Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
Mr. Book confirmed for Mayor Scruggs that the preferred alternative is to orient
the ramps and bridge to the east of 63rd Avenue. He further confirmed the facility will
be lighted and monitored with closed circuit cameras.
It was moved by Martinez and seconded by Lieberman to approve the
recommended actions on No. 25. The motion carried unanimously.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
26. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
This is a request for the City Council to approve the recommended appointments
to the following commissions that have a vacancy or expired term.
35
Effective Term
Date Expires
Citizens Commission on Neighborhoods
Grose Jr., James L. Cholla Appointment 11/25/2003 06/30/2004
Community Development Advisory Committee
Podzius, Jim Cholla Appointment 11/25/2003 07/01/2004
Public Safety Personnel Retirement Boards — Police Board
Campbell, Mark Appointment 11/25/2003 07/01/2004
The recommendation was to make appointments to the Commissions.
It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Clark, to appoint the applicants
listed above, for the terms listed above, to the Citizens Commission on
Neighborhoods, Community Development Advisory Committee and the Public
Safety Personnel Retirement Boards - Police Board. The motion carried
unanimously.
REQUEST FOR FUTURE WORKSHOP AND EXECUTIVE SESSION
It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Frate, to hold a City Council
Workshop at 1:30 p.m. in Room B-3 of the City Council Chambers on Tuesday,
December 2, 2003 to be followed by an Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. 38-
431.03.
It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Frate, to vacate the regular
council meeting of December 9, 2003, The motion carried unanimously.
It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Clark, to hold a Special
Council Meeting at 1:30 p.m. in Room B-3 of the City Council Chambers on
Tuesday, December 16, 2003 to be followed by an Executive Session pursuant to
A.R.S. 38-431.03 and a Regular City Council Meeting evening meeting at 7:00 p.m.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Mr. Jim Torgeson, a resident of the City of Chandler, referenced a letter from Ms.
Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City Manager. He said the city has taken a unique
interpretation of a human being holding a sign as being a portable sign. He said the
signs are not installed or permanent and hundreds of businesses want to use this form
36
of advertising. He stated he will contact everyone identified in the letter to discuss the
issue further.
COUNCIL COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Councilmember Clark announced a district meeting will be held on December 4
at 7:00 at Desert Mirage Elementary School. She said they hope to have
representatives from the Coyotes available to discuss event management and arena
related traffic plans. She stated Arizona's Finest calendars are now on sale for $10
each.
Councilmember Lieberman noted the city offices will be closed on Thursday and
Friday for the Thanksgiving Holiday.
Councilmember Martinez stated a neighborhood meeting will be held at Copper
Creek Elementary School on December 3 concerning the proposed Long John Silver
restaurant.
Councilmember Frate urged everyone not to drink and drive. He also asked
everyone to watch children around water.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
04,44
Pamela Hanna - City Clerk
37