Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Code Review Council Committee - Meeting Date: 1/28/2021MINUTES CITY CODE REVIEW COUNCIL COMMITTEE GLENDALE CIVIC CENTER 5750 WEST GLENN DRIVE GLENDALE, ARIZONA 85301 THURSDAY, JANUARY 28, 2021 5:00 PM CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 5 PM. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Chairperson Ray Malnar, Councilmember Joyce Clark, Yvonne Knaack, Ron Short, Michael Socaciu, Councilmember Bart Turner, Camille Donley, Rich LeVander, and Warren Wilfong are all present. Committee members absent: Barbara Lentz was absent. City staff present: Jamsheed Mehta, Development Services Director, Rick St. John (Deputy City Manager, Public Safety), David Richert (Interim Planning Administrator Services), Shannon Beck, Adam Santiago, and Diana Figueroa were present. CITIZEN COMMENTS There were no citizen comments made. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES A motion to approve the December meeting minutes was made by Ms. Knaack and seconded by Mr. Wilfong. All were in favor, and none opposed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS AND POSSIBLE ACTION A. Right of Way Language follow up (including language regarding landscape responsibility for property up to street curb) GCC 25-21 (g) Grass on Sidewalks (g) No person owning or occupying any property fronting on any street, alleyway, or public place in the city including the area between the property line of such property and the street shall allow thereon grass or weeds to exceed a height over six (6) inches when such conditions create a blighting condition or may harbor infestations or are likely to become a hazard to the public health or safety. Also, no person owning or occupying any property fronting on any street, alleyway, or public place shall allow grass or weeds to grow in sidewalk cracks, curbline openings, or other areas adjacent to the property that may create a tripping hazard. The city attorney and the council recommend adopting this language. Mr. Wilfong and Councilmember Clark both expressed appreciation for the changes, and Chairperson Malnar agreed. The committee moved forward to the next item. B. Barking Dogs GCC Sec 25-24 Miscellaneous (f) No person shall keep or harbor any animal that by frequent or habitual barking, howling, yelping, crowding or the making of other noises disturbs the peace and quiet of two or more independent witnesses who are not related. For purposes of this section, "animal" means any bird or non -human mammal. This ordinance was amended May 22, 2012 by ordinance, and the council recommend no change. Mr. Wilfong asked if the two people could be from the same household, and Mr. St. John stated they have to be "independent witnesses" of different households. Councilmember Clark asked if this still requires a log, and Mr. St. John said this isn't a requirement. Mr. Turner asked if this is a requirement of the code department, and if so, it might be best to have a log. Mr. Turner suggested adding language after "independent witnesses" "an enforcement officer may be considered one of the two independent witnesses." Councilmember Clark appreciated this verbiage. Chairperson Malnar asked how effective these codes are as they're currently written, and Mr. St. John stated based on city feedback, they're effective. C. Discussion and possible action on displaying vehicles on public and private property for sale Sec. 25-22. - Vehicles (a) No person shall park or permit to be parked any vehicle for the purpose of sale upon any public street or private property including vacant property except where the sale of a vehicle is customary and incidental to the principal use of the property and in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Glendale, Arizona, except as follows: (1) The display of one (1) vehicle for sale is permitted at a residence when the vehicle is titled to the owner or occupant of the properly, is parked on an improved parking surface on the property and is not being sold in connection with an automobile sales business. (2) No more than three (3) vehicles may be displayed for sale at the same residence within a calendar year and only one (1) vehicle shall be displayed for sale at one (1) time. The council recommended no change. D. Discussion and possible action on regulating home business traffic. Two classes of Home Occupations A. Home Occupations (Class I) are accessory uses in all residential districts. An occupation or profession is considered a home occupation when it: 1. Is conducted entirely from within the principal residence with no activity or storage in the garage or other accessory buildings, or in other outdoor areas; 2. Is conducted only by a resident or residents of the dwelling unit (no employees other than the family), no outside employees visit the site; 3. Does not have any customer traffic or more than one (1) commercial delivery vehicle a day coming to the residence related to the home occupation; 4. Produces no offensive noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odors, heat, or glare beyond the boundaries of the property; 5. Is clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling unit for residential purposes with storage for the use limited to a maximum of five (5) percent of the total floor area; 6. Has no signs or other exterior evidence of its existence; 7. A valid City sales tax and business license is maintained for business purposes; 8. Activity shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.; and 9. Any parking incidental to the home occupation shall be provided on site. B. Home Occupations (Class II) are subject to conditional use permit in all residential districts. It is required when any of the following standards cannot be met by the proposed home occupation: 1. Is conducted entirely from within the principal residence with no activity or storage in the garage or other accessory buildings, or in other outdoor areas; 2. Is conducted only by a resident or residents of the dwelling unit (no employees other than the family), no outside employees visit the site; 3. Does not have any customer traffic or more than one (1) commercial delivery vehicle a day coming to the residence related to the home occupation. The council recommended no change. Ms. Knaack expressed concerns about the administration and operations of the codes, and Mr. St. John explained the code as it is written is strong, but operationally, the stance taken by the code compliance division was less aggressive in the past. Mr. Turner asked for clarification about the function and process of conditional use permits. Mr. St. John said it's always supposed to go to the Planning Commission for voting. Chairperson Malnar clarified when a violation could be written in regards to mechanic shops or car sales, and he then asked if there are any proactive measures taking place. Mr. St. John admitted this has been handled in a complaint - driven fashion, but the goal is to become more proactive. Councilmember Clark expressed gratitude for Mr. St. John's dedication to making the city more proactive. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ON SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS A. COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE — YVONNE KNAACK 1. Repeat Offenders Ms. Knaack conferred with Mr. St. John and asked if noise complaints could be changed to a civil offense instead of a criminal offense. Unnecessary Vehicle Noise Sec. 24-94. - Unnecessary vehicle noise. (a) No person shall intentionally operate any vehicle: (1) At such a speed on a curve or turn as to create loud and unnecessary noise through the squealing of tires upon the public right-of-way; or (2) So to accelerate or decelerate in such a manner as to create loud and unnecessary noise through the squealing of tires upon the public right-of-way; or (3) So as to cause damage to the public right-of-way. (b) Engine braking; exceptions; violations. (1) A person commits the offense of engine braking if the person is operating a motor vehicle on any public street, roadway or highway in this city and uses an unmuffled engine brake. (2) Reckless and negligent violations of subsection (b) of this section shall constitute a violation and no proof of intent or knowledge of such violation is required. (3) A person is not in violation of this section if the person uses an unmuffled engine brake in an emergency situation to avoid imminent danger to a person or to property. (4) Violation of any provision of this section shall be deemed a nuisance. sen wheviolates any provision of this see4ien sW1 be guilty ef a Wass 1 misdemeaner- and sha - punished in aeeor-danee vvM state !a A violation of this section is a civil offense. An offense shall be subject to a fine of one hundred dollars ($100.00). 3 Ms. Knaack made a motion to move forward with the changes noted above, and Mr. Turner seconded. All were in favor, and none opposed. Mr. Turner asked if other noise complaints are civil and not criminal, and Mr. St. John said noise violations are a class -1 misdemeanor. Mr. Turner asked if this includes music and not just mechanical, and Mr. St. John confirmed this. Mr. Turner then asked the committee if they would feel comfortable with having the initial violation being civil, and then it could be criminal. Councilmember Clark added that officers should have some discretion because many of the officers aren't citing since it is automatically criminal. Chairperson Malnar agreed with Mr. Turner's suggestion and added the second violation would have to occur within a year of the first offense in order for the second offense to be criminal. Ms. Knaack made a motion to approve this amendment, and Mr. Turner seconded. With all in favor and none opposed, the motion passed. Ms. Knaack had concerned regarding this new process with codes and compliance and argued the council needs to be made aware that the committee wants repeat offenders to be held accountable. Mr. Turner noted they have to make enforcement and judicial branches aware of the community's needs and the changes the committee would like to make. Councilmember Clark suggested enforcement philosophy in general and the role of code enforcement in this. Chairperson Malnar noted this will be an agenda item for another meeting. In an effort to provide concrete examples of the issues with repeat offenders, Mr. Wilfong introduced his own experience with submitting complaints of this nature. B. RESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE — COUNCILMEMBER BART TURNER 1. Regulation of weeds and grass on desert landscaping Mr. Turner didn't have any new information, but he asked if the six-inch weed and grass limitation should also have the same limitation on desert landscaping. Chairperson Malnar said they were planning on a zero -tolerance policy for weeds or grass in desert or rock landscaping. Mr. Turner said the residential committee would focus on creating verbiage that focuses on the balance between aesthetics versus health and safety. Mr. Socaciu presented a hypothetical concern with desert landscaping limitations and rapid growth after rainfall. Mr. Turner will work on verbiage to address the committee's concerns. C. PARKING COMMITTEE — WARREN WILFONG 1. Language regarding temporary fencing Mr. Socaciu asked if Glendale has city height fencing limits. There is a limit, but the specifics aren't known. Mr. Socaciu also asked if there is a maximum length of fence allowed as well. Mr. Socaciu suggested temporary fencing (residential or commercial) should require a permit, and fencing should be installed by a professional. He also suggested there should be a specific person in charge of maintaining the fencing, and if fencing issues aren't addressed, there should be a fine. The time limit of three months was the recommendation, and there is a fee that is increased with every renewal. Upon a certain amount of renewals, there should be further monetary consequences. Chairperson Malnar asked if this was specifically for commercial fencing, and Mr. Socaciu said yes, but it could be relevant to residential areas as well. Chairperson Malnar proposed to defer to planning and zoning for guidance. Once this is returned to the Code Review Committee, they can present this to the Business Council Committee. Ms. Knaack and 51 Councilmember Clark both agreed with this method and with Mr. Socaciu's suggestions. After making progress over the next month, this will be an agenda item for the next meeting. D. MISCELLANEOUS COMMITTEE — RON SHORT Mr. Short had nothing to report at this time. UPDATES AND PRESENTATIONS A. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Mr. Jamsheed Mehta, Development Services Director, introduced himself and Mr. David Richert, the Interim Planning Administrator Services. B. CODE CONSULTANT There are no updates from Code Consultant. C. RICK ST. JOHN, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER There are no further updates from Mr. St. John. D. MICHAEL BAILEY, CITY ATTORNEY There are no updates from Mr. Bailey. COMMITTEE COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS AND TOPICS FOR NEXT MEETING Topics for the next meeting: temporary fencing, landscaping/grass length, enforcement philosophy of the committee, overall noise ordinances, yard art, and RV parking. Chairperson Malnar noted the committee is up for renewal at the end of February, and Chairperson Malnar will submit the renewal request for another year. Chairperson Malnar confirmed everyone still wished to be appointed, and everyone agreed. NEXT MEETING The next regular meeting of the City Code Review Committee will be held Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 5 PM, at the Civic Center, 5750 West Glenn Drive, Glendale, Arizona, 85301. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Malnar adjourned the meeting. The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:29 PM. Submitted by: Diana Figueroa 5