Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 1/13/2004 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2004, 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, Interim 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 2 resolutions and 3 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 DECEMBER 16, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to dispense with the reading of the minutes of the December 16, 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 Numbers 1 and Ms. Pamela Hanna, City Clerk, read consent agenda resolution number 2 by number and title. 1. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT — NOISE WALL PHASE IV, 67TH TO 591" AVENUES This is a request for City Council approval of a professional services agreement with Parsons Transportation Group for engineering design and construction management for noise wall improvements adjacent to Loop 101 between 67th and 59th avenues. One of the Council's strategic priorities is to enhance the quality of life for the citizens of Glendale. Construction of the noise walls will mitigate the sounds generated by the freeway and improve the quality of life for those residents of Glendale that live in the vicinity of Loop 101. The City of Glendale's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) has established funding to construct noise walls adjacent to Loop 101. In November 2001, Glendale 1 voters approved funding to construct transportation projects, including a pedestrian bridge over the Loop 101 in the 63rd Avenue alignment. To minimize the reconstruction of the noise wail required for the pedestrian bridge, the noise wall contract will include a conceptual design of the pedestrian bridge. The conceptual study will be funded by the Glendale Onboard (GO!) program. The noise walls adjacent to Loop 101 are being constructed in phases to meet funding availability. The first phase was between 51st and 58th avenues and was constructed under an agreement with the Arizona Department of Transportation. In 2002, the second phase was constructed between Union Hills Drive and 75th Avenue. The third phase, between 75th and 67th avenues, is currently under design and should go to bid in March 2004. Phase four is the final phase of construction for the noise walls. Council also approved this project in the 2003-2013 CIP. Engineering Department staff recently selected several firms to provide professional engineering services on an on-call basis for design and construction services. Parsons Transportation Group was selected from this list. Traffic on Loop 101 has increased significantly over the past few years. Noise levels have increased to a degree that Council authorized a study in 1999 to determine what the sound levels were and what they would be in the future. The study indicated that noise levels were above acceptable levels and funds were budgeted to construct noise barrier walls adjacent to the freeway. The projects were divided into four segments, this being the last. Prior noise wall construction has reduced the sound levels below those levels established by Council. Recently completed rubberized asphalt surfacing on the freeway has also helped reduce the sound levels adjacent to the freeway. The consultant and the city will conduct public information meetings during the final design process similar to those conducted in the prior segments of the noise wall so citizens can see the progress being made and the schedule for the project. Engineering Department staff negotiated a scope of work and fee for design and construction services with Parsons Transportation Group in the amount of $372,602.50. The noise wall component is $352,602,50 with funds available in Sound Walls, Account No. 61-9627-8300. The pedestrian concept study component is $20,000 with funds available in Bike Rte Imp/63rd-Olive/Peoria Vicinity, Account No. 25-9458-8330. Grants Capital One-Time Budgeted Unbudgeted Total Expense Cost X $372,602.5 0 Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number: Sound Walls, Account No. 61-9627-8300, $352,602.50 Bike Rte Imp/63rd-Olive/Peoria Vicinity, Account No. 25-9458-8330, $20,000 2 The recommendation was to approve the Professional Services Agreement with Parsons Transportation Group in the amount of $372,602.50. CONSENT RESOLUTIONS 2. ACCEPTANCE OF STATE GRANT FROM THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR DESIGN OF THE EASTSIDE TAXIWAY This is a request for City Council to accept a grant awarded to the Glendale Municipal Airport from the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), Aeronautics Division, in the amount of $7,363. This is the state's matching share of Federal Grant #15. A Council strategic priority is to promote economic development. The eastside taxiway is the first major piece of infrastructure necessary to develop the 82 acres of airport commercial property. This will greatly expand commercial development opportunities at the airport. On January 13, 1998, Council approved an updated Airport Master Plan for the Glendale Municipal Airport. The master plan included several recommended projects that would help the airport reach its optimum potential. Over the past five years, the city has completed the gabion necessary for runway expansion, constructed an auto parking lot at the Northwest hangar complex and extended, widened and strengthened the runway. The most recent runway project included extending the taxiway and replacing all of the runway and taxiway lights. The next project recommended in the airport master plan is the eastside taxiway. This project is for the initial infrastructure associated with the eastside of the airport and will open up that side of the airport to development. The city accepted FAA Grant #3-04-0064-15 in August of 2003 for the design of the eastside taxiway. This project is identified in the 1998 Airport Master Plan and the 2001 Environmental Assessment, both of which had advertised public meetings. The city's matching share of $7,363 is available in fund 25, the GO Glendale transportation program. The FAA and state grants are administered through fund 34. Grants Capital One-Time Budgete Unbudgete Total Expense Cost $7,363 $7,363 Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number: Fund 34 3 The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to accept the Arizona Department of Transportation, Aeronautical Division grant. Resolution No.3729 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 FROM THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AERONAUTICS DIVISION, FOR THE DESIGN OF THE EASTSIDE TAXIWAY AT THE GLENDALE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT It was moved by Lieberman and seconded by Martinez, to approve the recommended actions on Consent Agenda Item No. 1 and No. 2, including the approval and adoption of Resolution No. 3729 New Series. The motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING — LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS 3. APPLICATION ZONO3-08: GLENDALE SPRINGS CONDOMINIUMS — 6770 NORTH 471H AVENUE Ms. Teresa Hiliner, Senior Planner, presented this item. This is a request by Great Western Land and Recreation, Inc. for the City Council to approve Application ZONO3-08, Glendale Springs Condominiums, located at 6770 North 47th Avenue. The applicant is requesting to amend a stipulation previously approved with Rezoning Application Z-00-02. The stipulation required construction of an eight-foot high block wall along the west property line and was added to the original rezoning case as a method to buffer the adjacent land use. The applicant now proposes to install 46 Monde! Pine trees along the west property line to create a landscape buffer, to install a three-foot high screen wall to protect the landscaping, and to provide additional screening. The proposed amendment protects the privacy of existing neighbors and ensures public safety. The property was rezoned from C-2 (General Commercial) to R-4 (Multiple Residence) on May 8, 2001 . The applicants proposed a 48-dwelling unit condominium project, Glendale Springs, on this site. The zoning district requires a minimum six-foot high wall be constructed on the property line. During the Council approval of the rezoning, Council added a stipulation requiring an eight-foot high block wall be constructed along the west property line. The applicant attempted to develop the property according to the zoning stipulations. The original intention was to demolish the existing six-foot high wall and replace it with the required eight-foot high wall. Since the approval of the zoning case and construction plans, the mobile home park ownership 4 has changed. The new owners and residents of the mobile home park are not receptive to the replacement of the wall. Two alternative methods were examined to implement the adopted zoning stipulation. One method, constructing an eight-foot high wall immediately adjacent to the existing six-foot high wall may inadvertently damage the existing wall. The second option, constructing an eight-foot high wall two to three feet away from the existing wall would create a space between walls. This creates a potential hazard to residents in the neighborhood due to the parallel wall situation that would be created. The latest option presented by the applicant would screen the condominium use from the mobile home park. The trees would eventually grow to approximately 20 feet in height. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning application, with stipulations, on November 20, 2003. The project promotes the development of vacant property and provides a mixed type of housing. The proposed alternative would increase the amount of landscaping and create a buffer between the new condominiums and the existing mobile home park. The applicant sent notification letters to approximately 31 property owners and interested parties. The applicant received two responses. Both were favorable with one neighbor stating that he did not care as long as the existing wall was not disturbed. The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and approve application ZONO3-08 subject to the stipulations as recommended by the Planning Commission. Councilmember Lieberman asked how tall the trees will be at the time they are planted. He also asked about the grade difference between the properties on each side of the wall. Councilmember Clark asked what reason has the new owner of the trailer park offered as to why they will not cooperate with the applicant's offer to construct a new wall. Mr. Joe McGill, Applicant's representative, clarified for Councilmember Lieberman that 25 gallon trees will be planted 14 feet apart. Councilmember Lieberman expressed his opinion 25 gallon trees will fail to grow to 20 feet in the timeframe as proposed by the applicant. Councilmember Goulet asked if an eight foot wall would have to be an engineered wall. Mr. McGill explained building a wall on the property line would require removal of the existing wall. He said the utility easement along the property line was blue staked and it was determined the lines are located directly below the existing wall. He stated, while they have offered to reconstruct the existing wall as well as build a wall three feet away and cap the existing wall to prevent access between the walls, the owner of the trailer park has adamantly refused to cooperate. 5 With regard to Councilmember Lieberman's concern regarding the grade of the two properties, Mr. McGill explained the grade difference was leveled before the applicant purchased the property. He clarified the proposed three foot wall would be a retaining wall for the storm retention pond and would be located on the applicant's property. Councilmember Clark asked why the applicant is unable to construct a new eight foot wall in the location it is proposing to construct the three foot wall. Mr. McGill explained the proposed three foot wall is an underground retention wall located within the public utility easement. He pointed out constructing an eight foot wall at that location would result in six feet of empty space between the two walls which would be a safety and nuisance issue. Councilmember Lieberman pointed out that, during the Planning Commission hearing, the applicant indicated the three foot wall was intended to protect the trees from cars. Mr. McGill explained the three foot wall runs along the retention basin and will not screen the trees from the parking lot. Councilmember Clark asked who made the decision to use the proposed pine trees. Mr. McGill said the trees were the suggestion of the landscape architect. Councilmember Clark expressed concern about sap dripping onto cars parked under the pine trees. She asked if the city's landscape architect has offered any alternative suggestions. Mr. Trehurn, Vice President, Great Western Land and Recreation, said the decision regarding the trees was left to the landscape architect. Councilmember Lieberman referred to the analysis, stating it indicates a three foot screen wall will be constructed to prevent cars from backing into the trees. Ms. Hillner clarified the proposed type of trees was suggested by the applicant and approved by the city's landscape architect. She said the stipulation could be modified to require a certain distance between the trees and height of the trees, with the type of tree determined by the landscape architect. In response to Councilmember Lieberman's questions concerning the three foot screen wall, Ms. Hillner explained the original applicant mentioned a three foot screen wall to protect the trees. She said Council could add a stipulation requiring a three foot screen wall in areas where parking is adjacent to the trees. Mayor Scruggs asked why the three foot screen wall was not part of the Planning Department's recommendation. Ms. Hillner said previous discussions with the applicant included the three foot screen wall, not a three foot retaining wall. Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 3. As there were no comments, Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing. 6 It was moved by Lieberman, and seconded by Frate, to table Agenda Item No. 3 until the Council meeting of January 27, 2004. The motion carried unanimously. 4. APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION CUP03-13: 5850 WEST BELL ROAD Mr. Jon Froke, Planning Director, presented this item. This is an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a single retail use exceeding 75,000 square feet of gross floor area in the C-2 (General Commercial) zoning district. The subject parcel is part of a 36-acre shopping center that was developed in 1988. Original major tenants in the center included Costco, Levitz, and Home Base (later known as House to Home). The buildings for those three users were built contiguous to one another, with zero lot lines, giving the appearance of one large single building. The subject parcel is approximately 18 acres in size and is located at the northeast corner of the shopping center. The Conditional Use Permit proposes a 205,263 square foot Wal-Mart Supercenter including a garden center. No tire and lube express will be located at this site nor is gasoline sale proposed. The applicant intends to demolish the existing Costco and Levitz building and approximately 36,000 square feet of the eastern portion of the vacant House to Home building in order to construct the new building. At a public hearing on October 2, 2003, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit CUP03-13 subject to 11 stipulations on a five to one vote. Vice- Mayor Eggleston filed the appeal on October 14, 2003. Notification letters and meeting invitations were mailed to approximately 2,500 property owners and interested parties advising of this application. Last year, in conjunction with the citizen participation process, the applicant held four open houses regarding the proposed development. The dates for these open houses were April 21, 23, 28, and 30, 2003 and they were all held at the Arrowhead Country Club. The applicant then held a neighborhood meeting on the site on June 28, 2003. Primary issues expressed by the neighborhood included traffic created by this project, vacancy of current location, hours of operation and delivery, and security of the site. A copy of the applicant's Citizen Participation Final Report is attached. The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and determine if application CUP03-13 meets the required findings for Conditional Use Permit approval. If the City Council decides to approve the Conditional Use Permit, the approval should be subject to the 11 stipulations as recommended by the Planning Commission. In response to Councilmember Clark's request, Mr. Froke briefly summarized the five findings that must be met for a Conditional Use Permit to be approved. He 7 confirmed for Councilmember Clark that public comments made during the meeting should be relative to the five findings. Councilmember Clark asked if staff made a recommendation for approval or denial to the Planning Commission. Mr. Froke said it was staff's opinion the request met the required findings and, subject to the 11 recommended stipulations, that the application should be approved. Councilmember Clark asked if, in staff's opinion, the adjacent neighborhood would be adequately protected from the development. Mr. Froke responded yes, staff had done a similar analysis for the Wal-Mart at Northern Crossings. Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Froke to identify the differences between the Wal-Mart Superstore at Northern Crossings and the proposed store. Mr. Froke stated staff analyzes each project site on an individual basis. He said the configuration of the proposed site differs from the Northern Crossing site. Councilmember Goulet asked how the size of the proposed Wal-Mart compares with the existing store located across the street. Mr. Froke stated the new building will be 95,000 square feet larger than the existing store located on the southeast corner of Bell Road and 59th Avenue. Councilmember Goulet asked about the location of other Wal-Mart Stores in relation to the proposed site. Mr. Froke stated Wal-Mart has three Superstores in Glendale, one in the south part of the city at Camelback Road and Loop 101, another being constructed at Northern Crossing and a third at Union Hills Drive and the Loop 101. Councilmember Frate expressed concern about the impact the Supercenter will have on the adjacent elementary school, pointing out the store's loading docks will be directly behind the school property. He stated ingress and egress is better at the store's current location and he foresees future complaints concerning traffic. Mr. Froke said, as filed, the overall commercial site encompasses 36 acres with the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter encompassing approximately 18 acres. He stated the Talavi Business Park is 160 acres in size and includes commercial, business park and some retail uses. Councilmember Frate asked if Wal-Mart could incorporate a standalone market with the store in its present location. Mr. Froke explained the existing store has an expansion area of roughly 80 feet north to south and 380 feet west to east, totaling a net building expansion of approximately 30,000 square feet. He stated landscape buffers located on the site are required by ordinance and the PAD for Talavi. He said, however, there is a possibility that the current store could expand into the garden center area. Councilmember Frate stated he favors a Supercenter at the store's current location. He asked if the current center has adequate parking if the store were to expand. Mr. Froke stated the original design review application would not have been approved if sufficient space was not available for expansion. Councilmember Frate asked if the store is precluded from 24 hour operations in its present location. Mr. Froke responded no. Councilmember Martinez asked if staff has asked the applicant if they would be willing to expand the current location. Mr. Froke responded no. 8 Mr. McAdam, Vice President of Corporate Affairs, Wal-Mart Stores, said they believe the project will bring value and convenience to the community and feel it meets or exceeds each of the required findings. He said they further believe the store will revitalize the commercial site. He stated they held numerous meetings and listened to residents' concerns and are proud of the relationship they have begun to build with the City of Glendale. He said, while they have the support of many residents and some members of the Council, they recognize that they do not have the support of the majority of the Council. He said, therefore, they are withdrawing their application. The meeting recessed for a short break. ORDINANCES 5. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE FOR ANNEXATION AREA NO. 150: 5500 NORTH 91s' AVENUE Mr. Jon Froke, Planning Director, presented this item. This is a request for the City Council to adopt an annexation ordinance for approximately three acres of 91St Avenue right-of-way. The site is located on 91st Avenue between Missouri Avenue and the Montebello Avenue alignment. Glendale 2025, the city's General Plan, includes specific goals addressing the need for growth management. Goal 2 of the Land Use Element suggests the "Promotion of sound growth management methods" and Goal 3 of the Growth Areas Element suggests "Management of growth to achieve reasonable, responsible urban development." Annexation is a tool that can be used by the city to direct and manage growth. The portion of right-of-way included in this annexation area is located between Missouri Avenue and the Montebello Avenue alignment. The proposed annexation will support the implementation of the Event Management Plan for the Glendale Arena activities. Since this is a request for a right-of-way only annexation, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors will take the final action on this matter. The proposed annexation will add this portion of 91st Avenue to Glendale's jurisdiction and result in a more effective implementation of the Event Management Plan. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an ordinance increasing the Glendale City Limits, as defined in the annexation ordinance for Annexation Area Number 150. 9 Councilmember Clark asked staff to verify that the house being constructed along 91st Avenue has not encroached upon the right of way. Ordinance No. 2361 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, EXTENDING AND INCREASING THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, STATE OF ARIZONA, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 9, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 9-471, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES AND AMENDMENTS THERETO, BY ANNEXING THERTO CERTAIN TERRITORY CONTIGUOUS TO THE EXISTING CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE TO BE KNOWN AS ANNEXATION AREA NO. 150 It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Frate, to approve Ordinance No. 2361 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. 6. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE FOR ANNEXATION AREA NO. 151: 7373 WEST GRANDVIEW ROAD Mr. Jon Froke, Planning Director, presented this item. This is a request for the City Council to adopt an annexation ordinance for AN- 151. The 20.8-acre site is located west of 73rd Avenue on both sides of the Grandview Road alignment. Glendale 2025, the city's General Plan, includes specific goals addressing the need for growth management. Goal 2 of the Land Use Element suggests the "Promotion of sound growth management methods" and Goal 3 of the Growth Areas Element suggests "Management of growth to achieve reasonable, responsible urban development." Annexation is a tool that can be used by the city to direct and manage growth. The site is presently located within the City of Peoria. The property owner initially contacted the city in August 2003 to discuss the possibility of the city annexing this site. The impetus for the request is the ability to provide sewer to this site. There are inherent difficulties facing the City of Peoria to try to extend a sewer main for this location. However, Glendale has an established system immediately to the east of this site that serves the Park Paseo subdivision as well as other residential and office developments in this area. The property owner has coordinated with the City of Peoria on this matter. The City of Peoria Engineering Department has outlined development requirements for 75th Avenue and the construction of Grandview Road from 73rd to 75th avenues. The completion of this portion of Grandview Road will greatly enhance the traffic circulation 10 and overall access for Park Paseo residents, others residing in the general vicinity, and future development on this site. The City of Peoria adopted an ordinance deannexing this site on November 4, 2003. The proposed annexation would result in improved access and overall circulation specifically for the residents of the Park Paseo subdivision as well as adjacent neighborhoods. By annexing this 20.8-acre site, Glendale also has the ability to guide the development of these parcels and apply the city's development standards to ensure high quality development continues in this area. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an ordinance increasing the Glendale City Limits, as defined in the annexation ordinance for Annexation Area Number 151. Councilmember Clark asked if the proposed annexation meets the criteria set forth in the Annexation Policy recently adopted by City Council. Mr. Froke responded yes. Councilmember Goulet asked who would be responsible for constructing the street between 75th Avenue and the annexation area if the annexation request were denied. Mr. Froke said all of the property west of the annexation area is under single ownership and the owner is amenable to working with Peoria, Glendale and the developer to extend Grandview to 75th Avenue at the developer's cost. Mayor Scruggs asked if the city is still in keeping with the commitments made years ago to residents of Granada Estates. Mr. Froke responded yes. Councilmember Frate said residents of the Engle Home and Granada Estates developments are anxious for access to 75th Avenue. Ordinance No. 2362 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, EXTENDING AND INCREASING THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, STATE OF ARIZONA, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 9, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 9-471.02, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES AND AMENDMENTS THERETO, BY ANNEXING THERTO CERTAIN TERRITORY CONTIGUOUS TO THE EXISTING CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE TO BE KNOWN AS ANNEXATION AREA NO. 151 It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Martinez, to approve Ordinance No. 2362 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. 11 7. SALT RIVER PROJECT IRRIGATION EASEMENT AT 71ST & MARYLAND AVENUES Mr. Larry Broyles, City Engineer, presented this item. This is a request for the City Council to grant an irrigation easement in favor of Salt River Project (SRP) within the city's right-of-way for 71st Avenue south of Maryland Avenue. The purpose of this easement will allow SRP to complete the piping of its existing system as part of the development of Challenger Middle School. One of the Councils strategic priorities is enhancing the quality of life for Glendale residents. The granting of this easement will enable the completion of Challenger Middle School while maintaining irrigation service to area residents. As part of the development of Challenger Middle School at the southeast corner of 71St and Maryland Avenues, SRP is relocating and piping its irrigation facilities as needed to accommodate the development. This easement has been requested to allow SRP to complete the piping by crossing 71st Avenue right of way south of Maryland Avenue. There has been no previous City Council action on this item. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an ordinance authorizing the City Manager to execute an irrigation easement in favor of Salt River Project. Ordinance No. 2363 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 AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SALT RIVER PROJECT WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 71ST AVENUE SOUTH OF MARYLAND AVENUE AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHALLENGER MIDDLE SCHOOL; AND ORDERING THAT A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE BE RECORDED It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Lieberman, to approve Ordinance No. 2363 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 8. PROPOSED INCREASE TO SEWER USER CHARGES Mr. Roger Bailey, Utilities Director, presented this item. 12 This is a request for City Council to hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution implementing sewer user charge adjustments effective with the February 2004 sewer utility billing. This sewer user charge increase is required in order for the Sewer Enterprise Fund to maintain an adequate operational cash reserve and finance a ten-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 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. On June 5, 2001, at City Council Workshop, the 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. 13 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. 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. On November 28, 2003, Council approved setting the public hearing on the increase in sewer user charges for January 13, 2004 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 during the January 13, 2004, public hearing. The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing, waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution implementing sewer user charge adjustments effective with the February 2004 sewer utility billing. Vice Mayor Eggleston commented the proposed increase represents the third of three annual increases needed to provide additional capacity. Mr. Bailey agreed. Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item Number 8. As there were no comments, Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing. Resolution No. 3730 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 Eggleston, and seconded by Frate, to pass, adopt and approve Resolution No. 3730 New Series. The motion carried unanimously. 14 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, January 20, 2004, to be followed by an Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. 38- 431.03. The motion carried unanimously. CITIZEN COMMENTS Ms. Debra Bradford, a resident of the city of Glendale, expressed concern about vandalism in her neighborhood. She said they do not feel they are getting sufficient help from the police and, although they were told the neighborhood would have additional patrols, they are still having problems. She questioned the Police Department's priorities. Mayor Scruggs suggested Ms. Bradford speak with a representative from the Police Department prior to leaving the meeting. Ms. Bradford noted she has called the Police Department and felt as though she was being interrogated. Mr. Rudy Mariscal, a resident of the City of Glendale, agreed their neighborhood is not being adequately patrolled. He said the neighborhood has been the victim of a lot of vandalism and people constantly speed through the area. Mayor Scruggs directed the Police Department to work with the neighborhood. Ms. Amir Alyas, a resident of the City of Glendale Yucca District, addressed the Council concerning a business located at 5635 North 59th Avenue. He stated the business owner takes advantage of the fact the city closes at 5:00 p.m., placing an alcohol banner sign outside of his business every night. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Councilmember Lieberman encouraged everyone to attend the Glendale Glitter and Glows event Saturday night. He stated Glendale Civic Pride will meet at the new Adult Center this Saturday at 6:30 p.m. He invited residents of the new Cactus District to attend a meeting at Sunset School on January 22. Councilmember Martinez announced a neighborhood meeting will be held at Arrowhead Legends Elementary School on January 21 . He thanked those who took time to make their position and concerns known with regard to the Wal-Mart issue. He also thanked Wal-Mart representatives for their willingness to involve the neighborhood. 15 Councilmember Frate thanked the Police and Fire Departments for their efforts to collect money, clothes and toys during the holidays. He noted over $7,000 in new clothes and toys were stolen when the building they were being stored in was broken into. He said, however, Arizona Federal Credit Union and other Fire Departments donated $5,000 to replace the stolen items. He reported the City of Glendale had no child drownings in 2003. He urged everyone to continue to watch children around water. Mayor Scruggs stated the Glendale Arena has immediately translated into economic development opportunities for the city. She commended city employees involved in the arena's opening, stating they put in a considerable amount of extra time and effort during the holiday season to make the opening possible. She said she will always remember the tremendous outpouring of support the project received from the community. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Pamela Hanna - City Clerk 16