HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 3/21/1989v MINUTES OF THE WORKSHOP SESSION OF THECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFGLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA HELD TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 1989, AT 3:00 P.M. Mayor Renner called to order the Workshop Session of GlendaleCityCouncilinConferenceRoomB-3 of the Council Chambers. Council members present were: Bellah, Falbo, Huffman, Hugh, McAllister, and Tolby. Members Absent: None. CONSENT AGENDAORDINANCEAMENDMENT Z-88-14, BUSINESS PARK DISTRICTCOMMISSIONINITIATIVE) There is a need for a new balanced Industrial Park zoningdistricttoaccomodatefuturemixedemploymentuseswithintheCity. The Business Park district compliments the
existing more restrictive MP Industrial Park district. The
proposed Business Park district seeks to keep pace with
contemporary trends in business park development. This new
district also would allow for full implementation of the
Business Park land use classification as adopted in the
General Plan.
The proposed Business Park district includes a variety of
employment uses, including commercial office, high-tech
employers, and commercial support services. The development
of the Business Park district has included two Planning and
Zoning Commission workshops where interested property owners
and industrial developers provided input. The proposed
Business Park district provides a balance of employment uses
and support services to meet the daily needs of employees in
an attractive, park -like setting. The existing MP district
is appropriate in some locations, but the majority of the
future business park development will utilize the proposed
Business Park district.
The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended
approval of Z-88-14 at their February 23, 1989 meeting.
This item will be placed on a regular agenda for council
action.
REVISED SUBDIVISION ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
The Homebuilders' Association has requested that the City
eliminate its current requirements for performance bonds,
letters of assurance, or other financial assurances
guaranteeing complete and acceptable public improvements in
newly subdivided areas. In lieu of these assurances, the
Homebuilders' proposal would have the City withhold clearance
for electrical service and occupancy approval on individual
homes in the subdivision as the means to guarantee thesubdivisionimprovements. Most other communities in the Valley have abandoned therequirementsforbondinginfavoroftheCertificateofOccupancymethodtoassureconstructionofnecessaryinfrastructureimprovements. These other communities, alongwiththeCityofGlendale, have reported that they rarely, ifever, have had need to utilize the assurance bonds tocompleteimprovementsnotperformedbyadeveloper. Based on the past experiences of Glendale and othercommunitiesinthevalley, the high costs associated with thecurrentfinancialassurancesrequirementdonotprovidesubstantialbenefittotheCityorhomebuyerinrelationshiptothelowriskpotential. The alternate method ofwithholdingclearanceforelectricserviceandoccupancyapprovaltoguaranteethecompletionofimprovementsprovides
an acceptable level of protection for the City and homebuyer
in nearly every foreseeable instance.
Staff supports the Homebuilders' Association request to amend
the Subdivision and Minor Land Division Ordinance to
eliminate the current improvement assurance requirements
except for improvements on or under arterial streets; and to
substitute the clearance for electric service and Certificate
of Occupancy approval as the means to guarantee the
installation of subdivision and minor land division
improvements.
On November 14, 1988, the City Council Utilities Committee
reviewed and discussed the proposal from the Homebuilders'
Association and directed staff to prepare the necessary
amendments for consideration by the Planning and Zoning
Commission and City Council. At their meeting on February 23,
1989, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval
of the proposed amendment.
Councilman Bellah asked if performance bonds are done away
with then a homeowner or a developer files bankruptcy, how
are improvements made? Mr. Van Haren said one protection
regarding the arterial streets, the ordinance has a second
clause built in which requires the insurances in an equal
amount required to improve the streets. That would leave the
interial improvements and the city would not issue the
certificates of occupancy or would we complete the
improvments.
Mr. Coons said a developer could get a final plat approved
file bankruptcy and has already sold a lot for a custom
home. There will be no streets or no one there to quarantee
them, the city might have to withhold the approval of the
occupancy of the house because there is no infracture.
This item will be placed on a regular agenda for councilaction. WORKSHOP SESSIONPUBLICSAFETY/COURTS COMPLEXThePublicSafety/Courts Complex is progressing perschedule. The architect has developed exterior elevationsfortheCounciltoreview. The Community Development Group has been working closely withthearchitecttoensuretheprojectmeetsthedesiredstandardsfordowntowndevelopment. Jim Manzelmann, architect for The Benham Group, briefed thecouncilontheproject.
Mayor Renner asked if there was a cost difference in the
materials? Mr. Manzelmann said any one of the plans could be
brought within the budget.
Mayor Renner asked if the height was the same on each plan.
Mr. Manzelmann said there are some differences at the entries
but all the structures are basically the same.
Councilman McAllister asked if the antenna would be an
obstruction for a helicopter. Mr. Manzelmann said there is a
communications specialist working with the heliport project.
Vice Mayor Tolby asked if the water feature was necessary.
Mr. Manzelmann said the water feature is being considered as
an add -alternate.
Chief Rose commented the design team prefers the Village
concept.
Councilman McAllister agreed. Vice Mayor Tolby concurred.
Mayor Renner stated the consensus was for the Village concept
incorporating the pillar design in the tower. He also
suggested give a presentation to the Downtown Development
Corporation.
Mr. Manzelmann asked what the preference for a helipad would
be? Mayor Renner suggested investigating the potential use
as parking in the future. Council agreed it was an
engineering decision.
Councilman McAllister asked the cost of the antenna offsite.
Chief Rose said the more remote the more links that can fail
during an emergency and that is why we bring one antenna
close to the base for those concerns.
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN AND HELIPORT STUDYTheAirportMasterPlanandHeliportStudy has beencompleted. It has been reviewed and approved by the PlanningAdvisoryCommitteeandtheAirportAdvisoryCommission. The consultant for the project, Mr. Jim Harris of CoffmanAssociates, will be presenting the Master Plan information totheCouncilandwillbeavailabletoansweranyquestions. Airport expansion plans, as well as the financial program, will be reviewed with the City Council. Ruth Fisher and Jim Harris presented the master plan. Councilman Falbo asked if the city would need a 404 permit? Mr. Harris stated he understood the issue would have to beaddressedatthetimetherunwayextensionconstructionwouldtakeplace, but it was just a formality.
Councilman Falbo said the 404 permit was more than a
formality and would like it explored. Mr. Harris said he
would check into the permit.
Vice Mayor Tolby asked if the heliport was private property?
Mr. Harris said it was. Vice Mayor Tolby commented he felt
the heliport would be low use and it was being put on a prime
piece of property. Mr. Harris said the heliport could be
moved if the council so desired. Mr. Harris recommended that
the heliport be placed on a temporary basis to see how the
usage would be.
Mayor Renner said he was also concerned about the use and
also the use of the t -hangars and suggested moving them
adjacent to the private property. Mr. Harris said it was a
possibility.
Vice Mayor Tolby said he agreed the executive hangars and the
heliport needs to have an up -front location but t -hangars do
not and they need to go on the far end and save the upper end
for more prestigious uses.
Mayor Renner said this was an issue that needs to be looked
at. He asked how difficult it would be to come back with a
modified plan showing the executive hangars adjacent to the
private property and the heliport on the north end. Mr.
Harris said it would be no problem they could just revise the
plan to reflect those changes.
This item will be brought back to workshop for further
information on the layout issues raised and more in-depth
examination including the economic development of the
property.
PERMANENT EASEMENT FOR THE CHANNELIZATION OF NEW RIVERKenReedybriefedthecouncilontheFloodControlDistrictofMaricopaCountyrequestingapermanenteasementonCitypropertylocatedeastandsouthoftheGlendaleMunicipalAirportintheNewRiverfloodplain. The Flood Control District desires to construct improvementsupstreamfromtheconfluenceofNewRiverandtheAguaFriaRiver. These improvements will be maintained by the FloodControlDistrict. The improvements will not affect theexpansionplansfortheCityofGlendaleMunicipalAirport. Mayor Renner asked if these agreements would be done as apackageorproceedwiththeFloodDistrict. Mr. Reedy saidthefirstonethatneedstobedealtwithisnorthofBethanyHomeRoadforapermanenteasementthencomebackwithanagreementwiththeFloodDistrictsouthofBethanyHomeRoad
and a parallel agreement with the City of Phoenix.
Councilman McAllister said the concern over noise with the
zoning in the City of Phoenix asked if the agreement should
be done with Phoenix first. Mr. Reedy said they would be
dealing with them parallel.
Councilman Falbo asked what the flow was established at? Mr.
Reedy said historical flow was 54,000 cfs and after the
construction of Adobe and New River dams and prior to the
completion of the ACDC the flow is reduced to 39,000 cfs;
after construction the flow should be about 46,000 cfs.
Councilman Falbo asked if all was needed was a flowage
easement and the right of ingress and egress for
maintenance. Mr. Reedy said that was correct.
Mayor Renner asked if there was a time limit. The Flood
Control District representative said they were close to going
out to bid and the only thing holding them up was the 404
permit.
This item will be placed on a regular agenda for council
action.
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Z-88-27, SPECIAL USE PERMIT DISTRICT
RESTHAVEN PARK CEMETERIES)
Jerry Swanson and Bob Coons briefed the council on the
Resthaven Park Cemeteries, Inc., who proposes a Zoning
Ordinance text amendment to create a new Special Use zoning
district which will allow them to build a full service
cemetery. Their interest is to expand the existing cemetery
facilities to introduce new services. Those services may
include a crematorium, mausoleum, chapel, and administration
offices. Currently the Zoning Ordinance provides for
mortuaries in the C-2 commercial district, but does not allowtheotherproposedservices. The requested special use permit district process will beusefultoconsiderrequestsforsuchlandusesasafull-service cemetery, as well as other unique land useswhichhavebeenrequestedbypropertyownersoverthepasttwoyears. Other unique land uses proposed for the specialusepermitdistrictare: commercial recreational facilities; commercial radio, television and telephone transmittingfacilities; helistops or heliports; resort hotel; commercialrecreationalvehiclestoragefacilities; major public utilityfacilities; and golf courses. The special use permit district will be an overlay districtwhichwillusethesameprocessasanyotherrezoningrequests.
The General Plan identifies the need to establish a mechanism
to process special land use requests. The special use permit
district includes a preliminary development plan requirement
which will regulate the specific use of the property.
Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended
approval of Z-88-27 at their February 23, 1989 meeting.
Vice Mayor Tolby asked what the current zoning was? Mr.
Coons responded R-4.
Vice Mayor Tolby asked where in the city could there be a
cemetery. Mr. Coons said the zoning ordinance does not make
a provision for an allowance of a cemetery in the city today.
Vice Mayor Tolby stated he felt there should be a zoning
category for cemeteries rather than a permit process. Mr.
Swanson said that is the purpose of this, it should create a
district that would zone the parcel request as a special use
cemetery.
Councilman Falbo asked if the special use permit dissolved if
someone comes in and decides for different uses. Mr. Coons
said they would have to rezone the property for an alternate
use.
This will be placed on a regular agenda for council action.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 5:45
p.m.
Assistant City Clerk