Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 10/7/2008 *PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at the Workshops, Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council. MINUTES CITY OF GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP OCTOBER 7, 2008 1:30 P.M. PRESENT: Vice Mayor Manuel D. Martinez, and Councilmembers Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet, Yvonne J. Knaack, and H. Phillip Lieberman ABSENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City Manager; Craig Tindall, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City Clerk 1. ANNEXATION APPLICATION AN-182: AQUIFER RECHARGE FACILITY - 11719 WEST GLENDALE AVENUE CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Stephen S. Cleveland, Deputy City Manager, and Jon M. Froke, AICP, Planning Director This is a request by Planning staff for the City Council to provide guidance concerning an annexation request for approximately 215 acres of land located north and south of Glendale Avenue, between the 115th Avenue alignment and El Mirage Road. The request includes both privately-owned land and land owned by the City of Glendale, including the city's aquifer recharge facility. Glendale 2025, the City of Glendale's General Plan, includes specific goals addressing the need for growth management. Annexation is a tool that can be used by the city to direct and manage growth. The proposed annexation is consistent with the Council goal for economic development, as the private property is intended to be redeveloped for industrial uses once an existing mining operation is terminated. The proposed annexation is also consistent with the Council goal of a city with high-quality services for citizens. Currently, Maricopa County has land use and permitting authority over the Aquifer Recharge Facility and other future city facilities which may be placed on the city-owned property. Once annexed, future decisions about the provision of city facilities at this location will be made within Glendale. 1 The annexation will implement the Council direction as adopted in the Annexation Policy, to consider annexation requests anywhere within the Municipal Planning Area. The annexation will bring city-owned facilities and property into the corporate limits of the city, rather than having city facilities and properties under Maricopa County jurisdiction. There are currently no constructed buildings on the proposed annexation area. A portion of the property is used for the city's aquifer recharge facility, while other parts have been mined. The privately-owned land will be developed as an industrial park in the future. This is an opportunity to develop an employment base in this portion of the Glendale Avenue Corridor. The city-owned property located north of Glendale Avenue is in the floodplain and floodway of the Agua Fria River. South of Glendale Avenue, most of the city-owned property is located in the floodplain or floodway. Flood control measures will be addressed as needed. The proposed annexation is not within the noise contours of Luke Air Force Base or the Glendale Municipal Airport. Based on the current land use and police calls for service for this property, no additional police staffing is currently required. The existing west side beat officer(s) will be able to respond to any additional calls for service. Based on current population, there is no need for a fire station at this time. The area is designated Heavy Industrial (HI), Public Facility (PF), and Parks and Open Space (P/OS) on the Glendale General Plan. The zoning district which implements the Heavy Industrial designation is M-2 (Heavy Industrial). A portion of the privately-owned land is currently zoned IND-3 (Heavy Industrial), with a Special Use Permit for an inert landfill, with the remainder of the property and the entire city-owned property zoned R-43 (Rural Residential) in Maricopa County. After annexation, the city applies the most compatible Glendale zoning district to a newly annexed property compared to the existing county zoning. The most comparable Glendale zoning districts are M-2 (Heavy Industrial) and A-1 (Agriculture) respectively. Once annexed, the development of the site will require the city to provide police, fire, and sanitation services. Since the property currently has no buildings, the city has the opportunity to work with the applicant at the time of zoning to best plan for the emergency response and sanitation needs. 2 The next step in the process, if the Council guides staff to proceed with the annexation, is to record the blank annexation petition and schedule a public hearing for the annexation as required by state statute. The annexation of the area will require that any future development, both private and city owned, meet the Glendale General Plan requirements, as well as all other development standards for the city, rather than Maricopa County's. Staff is seeking guidance from the Council on whether or not to continue with the annexation process in accordance with the procedures outlined in the state statutes. Mr. Jon M. Froke, AICP, Planning Director, provided a brief summary. He asked Council for any comments or questions. Councilmember Clark asked how many acres the Aquifer Recharge Facility will consume out of the two hundred fifteen. Mr. Froke explained the facility was south of Glendale Avenue and he was not sure exactly of the acreage. He added no facility changes are planned as part of this annexation request. He asked Mr. Ken Reedy to further explain. Mr. Reedy stated the Aquifer Recharge Facility was about thirty acres and was constructed in 2000 as part of the Western Area Water Reclamation Facility. Councilmember Clark asked if this was basically a clean-up action to bring the Recharge Facility in conformance with zoning. Mr. Froke stated she was correct. Councilmember Lieberman welcomed Deputy City Manager, Mr. Steve Cleveland to the workshop. He then asked if this was the old race track property owned by Mr. Kent Myers. Mr. Froke responded, yes. Mr. Froke indicated this was the first step in the annexation process and with Council's consent, they would like to bring this back at an evening hearing for adoption. Councilmember Lieberman stated he was in favor of it moving forward. Councilmember Goulet asked if the privately owned property was slated to be developed only as an industrial park. Mr. Froke explained it was the applicant's intent to build a business park in the future along Glendale Avenue. Councilmember Goulet asked if they knew the size of the project. Mr. Froke responded it would be in the thirty acre range. Mr. Froke reiterated that they will proceed with this application and work with the applicant. Staff will bring this back in a future evening agenda for adoption of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Martinez thanked Mr. Froke for his presentation. He stated the consensus from the Council is for staff to continue to proceed with the process. 3 2. MAJOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT M-GPA08-04: NORTHERN PARKWAY COMMERCE CENTER - 12300 WEST GLENDALE AVENUE CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Stephen S. Cleveland, Deputy City Manager, and Jon M. Froke, AICP, Planning Director This is a request by El Paso Natural Gas Company for the City Council to discuss a Major General Plan Amendment (M-GPA) to the Land Use Map for approximately 344 acres located at the northwest corner of Glendale Avenue and El Mirage Road to develop the Northern Parkway Commerce Center (NPCC). The request is to change the General Plan Land Use designations from HI (Heavy Industry) and P/OS (Parks and Open Space) to BP (Business Park), PC (Planned Commercial), CCC (Corporate Commerce Center), and LCLU (Luke Compatible Land Use). Northern Parkway Commerce Center eliminates residential dwelling units and creates a sizeable economic base in this portion of the Glendale Avenue Corridor. Glendale 2025, the city's General Plan, includes specific goals addressing the need for growth management. M-GPAs are a means to direct and control growth. Strategic goals set forth by the City Council call for quality economic development. The intent of the proposal is to develop a mixed-use employment center, which will contribute to the city's economic well being. The proposal is consistent with city land use policies and state statutes relating to development in the vicinity of Luke Air Force Base (AFB). The applicant proposes to develop the NPCC as a mixed-use employment center on a total of 473 acres. The amendment area is comprised of approximately 344 of the total 473 acres, and is bounded by Northern Avenue (future Northern Parkway) to the north, El Mirage Road to the east, Glendale Avenue to the south, and the Luke AFB 65 Idn Contour Line to the west. The amendment area consists of 340 acres outside, and 4 acres within, the 65 Idn Contour Line The applicant has agreed, and the city will stipulate at the time of approval, that no residential development will be allowed within the CCC area. Additional public safety facilities or personnel will not be required as a result of the proposed amendment, but will be addressed through the rezoning process. The Commission held the first of two public hearings for the proposal, as required by state statutes, on October 2, 2008, at the Glendale Adult Center. No official action was taken at this hearing. The second public hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled for October 23, 2008. The Commission will take official action at the second public hearing. 4 The Planning Commission held a workshop for the proposal on September 4, 2008. The proposal provides a policy framework for a future commerce park which can result in employment opportunities and enhanced economic development. The proposal can provide development that is compatible with Luke Air Force Base and the industrial character of the area and with emerging development patterns in this portion of the West Valley. A.R.S. § 9-461.06 requires transmittal of proposed M-GPAs to specified entities at least sixty days prior to providing notice of the first public hearing. The city transmitted the proposal on July 3, 2008. Luke AFB provided the following comments in a letter dated July 24, 2008: "The AFB indicated that the El Paso property lies particularly inside the 1988 JLUS 65 ldn 'high noise or accident potential zone' as defined by A.R.S. § 28-8461 and is within the 'territory in the vicinity of a military airport,' also defined by A.R.S. § 28-8461 ." It should be noted that the portion of the El Paso property that lies inside the 65 ldn Contour Line (with the exception of 4 acres) is not within the subject amendment area. Luke AFB further indicated (in the above-referenced letter) that the proposed land use designations will not negatively impact flying operations. The City of Litchfield Park, in a letter dated July 16, 2008, noted that the removal of the P/OS designation disrupts the continuity of any potential trail or pathway system in that area at a time when alternative transportation modes should be emphasized. There are no paths or trails designated on the property. The P/OS is for a small wash which will be addressed as part of the entitlement process. Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), in an e-mail dated August 6, 2008, indicated that they had no comments regarding the proposed NPCC. The applicant conducted a neighborhood meeting for the request on August 6, 2008 at the Glendale Adult Center. Meeting notification was mailed to 129 property owners within a 1 ,500-foot radius of the request, 61 parties on the city-wide and Yucca District interested parties' lists, and 16 additional parties including Luke AFB, the cities of El Mirage and Litchfield Park, and Dysart School District. Nine property owners attended. Neighborhood concerns centered on issues generally not associated with NPCC. They included Northern Parkway, traffic along El Mirage Road, timeline for development, possibilities for annexation, and the processes for, and differences among, a general plan amendment, rezoning, and annexation. Property owners were supportive of the request. 5 Staff received one telephone call from a property owner in the Capistrano residential neighborhood to the south, who expressed concern regarding the loss of a mountain view and inquired about the possibility for reimbursement for loss of property value. Staff is seeking guidance from the Council to continue with the M-GPA process for this request. Mr. Jon M. Froke, AICP, Planning Director, provided a summary and a power point presentation. He asked for any comments or questions. Councilmember Goulet referred to a letter in opposition from the Morton Salt Company. The letter states Morton Salt believes keeping this area as heavy industrial is vital for the preservation and expansion of emerging industries. He asked if by changing this, they were creating a situation where future heavy industrial use is stifled. Mr. Froke stated, with all due respect to the letter writer, staff believes that the proposal before them is compatible for quality economic development, job growth and compatible with the existing salt operation. Councilmember Goulet inquired as to the proposed buffer not being adequate and the company requesting a larger buffer. Mr. Froke stated the issue had been discussed at last week's Planning Commission meeting. He noted the buffer was really a zoning issue and will be looked at next year when they discuss the zoning case and the annexation. He added they believe adequate buffers can be provided; however, at this point, it was still very conceptual. Councilmember Lieberman asked Mr. Froke to point out certain areas on the map. Mr. Froke explained locations and sites on the map. Councilmember Lieberman asked if El Paso Gas had any intentions regarding the property, given that the company had been interested in it at one time. Mr. Froke responded that El Paso Natural Gas had stated publicly they would like this property developed as a business park. Councilmember Clark commented on a meeting with El Paso Natural Gas she, as well as Mayor Scruggs, attended. She thanked El Paso Natural Gas for revising their entire plan and developing a plan that included the business park. They also eliminated all residential and had been very sensitive to Luke Air Force Base's needs. She noted they had done an excellent job in meeting the needs of the city and community. Councilmember Frate commented on a Luke Air Force Base letter submitted on July 24, 2008 and asked to read a portion into the record. He quoted, "As described, the land use designation changes will not negatively impact the flying operations at Luke Air Force Base. Since plans are not available to show the type of business that will be part of the Center, Luke Air Force Base requests the opportunity to provide additional comments when plans have been determined." Mr. Froke agreed. He reiterated this was broad base land use planning at this point and in its early stages. He noted staff will be working with Luke Air Force Base next year on future plans. 6 Vice Mayor Martinez stated that the consensus from the Council is for staff to continue to proceed with the process. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m. 7