[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] so [Music] so [Music] so [Music] [Music] so [Music] so [Music] [Music] [Music] so [Music] [Music] [Music] so [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] so [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] um we got everybody ready to go who's over supposed to be sitting there julie i guess we better wait for her to show up there she is you guys ready to go okay good evening welcome glendale city council meeting of august 11 2020 meeting is called order attendance roll calls not necessary all members are in attendance if you please take note our next two items on our agenda are the invocation and the pledge of allegiance the invocation is going to be delivered by retired pastor tom wick of the first united methodist church uh gentlemen if you would please stand with me uh everyone please not just men uh if gentlemen if you're wearing a hat if you'd please remove it if it's appropriate uh if you will stand with me with the invocation and then followed by the pledge of allegiance well good evening loved ones thank you for the invitation to be here would you pray with me almighty god we come to the city council meeting today grateful for the incredible gifts of faith and of courage for it was faith and courage that led people to this valley well over a century ago and put in their hearts a dream for a community called glendale today we give thanks for those people who have lived there for generations but we also give thanks for the newcomers and some that are so new they haven't even unpacked yet as we gather today like those people go long ago may we continue to dream great dreams for our community that we may be a place where all are invited where all are welcome and where every person has the opportunity to be everything you meant them to be we ask your blessing this evening on our mayor on the members of the city council and as we meet tonight gently guide our conversations and our decisions that what happens here this very day may be pleasing to you and maybe a blessing to all those who call glendale home amen amen thank you sir everyone please join me in the pledge of allegiance pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice thank you okay i'd like to remind everyone of the following the meeting is televised live on the city of glendale's facebook and youtube pages as well as also channel 11 glendale 11. our meetings are still currently located at the glendale civic center and we'll make remain that way until the cove 19 gets a little bit better under control with the audience seated next door we respectfully request that if you're unable to social that you are able to social distance make sure that you please do and also if you'll wear your face covering and just be safe for those of you in the audience seated next door please be aware that those of us in this room we have a screen that allows us to see you well those of you in the room next also have a screen that allows you to see and hear what's occurring in this room with that said if you wish to speak on any item on the agenda please compete complete the golden card and give it to the officer in the room that will be given to the city clerk and then passed on to me if you've submitted a speaker card and indicated that you wish to speak on an agenda item allow you the time to make your way to the room and to the podium to speak we'll be allowing three minutes for each speaker tonight on all agenda items please keep in mind the citizens comment section is at the end of each voting meeting and you'll be allowed for the public to speak about anything that's not on the agenda i'd like to thank everyone for your patience with that i would like to ask for the consideration of the minutes from the june 23rd 2020 voting meeting council members do you have any corrections or additions to those minutes hearing none do i have a motion to approve the june 23rd 2020 voting minutes may our movie approve the minutes of june 23rd 2020 voting meeting second i have a motion from council member hugh has sent council member tom shop to prove the minutes all in favor please signify by saying aye aye aye any opposed say nay you guys have do you have what that motion does carry and then we also have the consideration of the minutes from the july 9 2020 special meeting any corrections or additions to those hearing none can i get a motion to approve the july 9 2020 special meeting minutes there i also move we approve the minutes of the july 9 2020 special meeting second okay i have a motion also from council member hugh and councilmember tom schaff ii to approve the minutes all in favor please signify by saying aye aye aye aye opposed say nape here's your eyes have it do you have with that motion also carries unanimous moving on the boards and commissions and other bodies uh for those of you that are nominated please wait to come forward and tell a council member aldama calls you up and that'll be after we take a vote so if you're in the room next door as you hear your name you can make your way to the hallway but don't come into this room until we vote and then call you into the room with that councilmember do you have any nominations to offer boards commissions and other bodies yes thank you mayor i motioned to approve the following appointments cookie pepperini to the community development advisory committee for return ending 6 30 20 22 ezekiel ojo to the community development advisory committee for a term expiring 6 30 20 22. calvin carvalho to the library advisory board for a term expiring january thirty first twenty twenty one lisa baker as chair of the community development advisory committee for a term expiring 6 30 20 21 and leslie mill as vice chair of the community development advisory committee for a term expiring 6 30 20 21 mayor okay uh if that's all you have do i have a second okay i have a motion council member i'll dominate council member tom chop to prove these citizens to boards commissions and other bodies as read by council member al doma all in favor please vote i i any opposed vote nay your guys have it do you have it that motion carries unanimous council member eldama would you please please call our newly appointed members to join me up here in front of my table thank you mayor we have only two joining us today will ezekiel ojo and cookie perverini please join us in the room we have the swearing-in when i saw him get up get over here [Music] thank you good to see you both look if you'll stand here you'll stand here okay if you will hold your right hand up and you can uh state your name say i state your name do solemnly swear that i will support the constitution of the united states and the constitution and the laws of the state of arizona and i will bear truth faith and allegiance to the same and defend him against all enemies born in domestic and that i will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties okay my turn of my office according to the best of my ability so help me god congratulations thank you hold on hold on stand right here we'll get a picture real quick go ahead and turn around there you go yeah smiling isn't going to work right now perfect thank you thank you welcome next up is our consent agenda and consent resolutions uh we'll now move to our consent agenda items four through twenty one on the consent agenda our routine nature have been previously studied by the city council at a workshop session they are intended to be acted upon in one motion by this council miss bower will you please read the consent resolutions item 15 through 21 item 15 resolution number r 20-92 a resolution the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing and directing the entering into of a memorandum of agreement between the u.s department of justice bureau of alcohol tobacco firearms and explosives and the glendale police department for the reimbursement of overtime salary costs associated with the atf task force item 16 resolution number r 20-93 a resolution to counsel the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing and directing the entering into of grant agreement number a-c-e-s-f-21-023 with the arizona criminal justice commission for acceptance and expenditure of the arizona coronavirus emergency supplemental funding program award in the approximate amount of one hundred sixty three thousand dollars and one one one hundred sixty three thousand eighty six dollars for personnel overtime professional and outside consultant and contractual services and operating expenses supplies to prevent prepare for and respond to the coronavirus item 17 resolution number r 20-94 a resolution the council the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing and directing the entering into of a grant agreement number 2020-vd-bx-1656 with the u.s department of justice office of justice programs and authorizing the acceptance and expenditure of the coronavirus emergency supplemental funding program award in the approximate amount of 266 504 dollars on behalf of the glendale police department item 18 resolution number r 20-95 a resolution the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing and directing the entering into of a grant agreement number cv 19-20-008 with the arizona criminal justice commission for acceptance and expenditure of the paul coverdell forensic sciences improvement grant program award in the approximate amount of two thousand four hundred forty four dollars to improve forensic science services item 19 resolution number r 20-96 a resolution of the council the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing the acceptance of the arizona central region coveted 19 grant funding in the approximate amount of 10 thousand dollars on behalf of the glendale fire department and authorizing the expenditure of such funds for personal protective equipment due to the onset and continuation of the coronavirus covet 19 pandemic item 20 resolution number r 20-97 a resolution of council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing and directing the entering into of an intergovernmental cooperative purchasing agreement with national purchasing partners for the purpose of making cooperative purchases item 21 resolution number r 20-98 a resolution the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing and directing the entering into of an independent contractor agreement with arizona community action association doing business as wildfire for community action program funding effective july 1 2020 to june 2021 and that concludes the consent resolutions thank you i i have one card here that i believe it's item number four jake curtis wanted to speak speak on i believe it's number four mr curtis are you here did you want to speak on item number four okay take the podium if you would sir state your name for the committee and uh if you live in the district name the district if you don't live in the district uh the city that you're from okay uh thank you you do need to hold this up my name is jake curtis i'm an attorney at birch and craciolo i do not live in the district in glendale i live in the city of phoenix i've been retained by the applicant for a liquor license this is the chimney days smoke and vape shop my understanding is that the the protest is based on the fact that they had what may be a gaming device in their shop for a short period of time they the owner of that device assured them that it was legal when they got notified that it was potentially not legal uh they stopped using it then the owner gave them a bunch of data said that it was legal that they were working it out with the department of gaming um they didn't hear from the department of gaming no one gave them a notice of violation then when they filed their liquor license application the investigator from the city of glendale police department came in told them that the devices were arguably not legal so they immediately unplugged them put them in the back and never use them again so these devices have not been used since they first got notified in march by the city of glendale pd and my understanding is that the legality of these devices is currently being adjudicated before the department of gaming and so if that's the only basis for denying the liquor license or submitting a protest to department of liquor i just wanted you to understand those circumstances and understand that the applicant in this case was completely innocent was assured by the manufacturer and owner that the device was legal and as soon as they learned that it was potentially not legal they immediately stopped using it and so the applicant does meet the criteria for getting a liquor license they have otherwise no violations a perfect history no criminal record and so this so i'm here today to ask you to not submit a protest to the liquor license and i'm happy to answer any questions that you might have any questions from the council mr tom chop thank you mayor i'd like to ask mr bailey what would be the appropriate action to table the item for the time being or uh mayor and council there's generally a time frame that the state places on these so the applicant may have i'm looking at the applicant's representative because if there is the desire to research more information then you could table it otherwise you could amend your emotion but generally there is a time frame within which the city is to um make a decision on these if not then they're actually deemed approved by the department of liquor so uh my my ultimately my recommendation would be to actually take action on the item with what you see as appropriate and if you have any questions i believe there's probably staff who's available to answer those questions yeah i would personally like staff to come up preferably rick if you could give us the city's side of that if you would member mayors of the council the investigator background investigator for the police department provided a written documentation outlining his investigation back in april he went to the business not knowing that the gaming department had already been to the business he personally witnessed the gaming device in the business at that time had a conversation with the owner who claimed that she didn't know that the device was illegal and reporting the device to the gaming department learned from the gaming department that they heard had already been to the business that they had already contacted the owner notified her that the device was illegal and told her that it needed to be removed they were met with quite a bit of resistance from the owner who didn't recognize their authority didn't want to talk to them didn't want to provide identification our investigator our background investigator from the police department met some of the same resistance from the owner and for that reason as well as for the reason of the gaming devices his recommendation is that this council protest this license based on capability qualification and reliability questions from the council thank you mayor um i'm concerned with with the denial based on the background from the police they've only had a total call of service of 11. and we're going to go into another one here in a minute at number five 73 calls and there's there's calling for an approval of that one so i'm not too sure that i'm in favor of denying this i'm based just on that item if it's been rectified and it's done i don't see why we would disapprove of this uh liquor license for this uh this business they've only had 11 calls for service uh nine other non-criminal one fight and one fraud and forgery and then the item that mr saint john is referring to has been resolved so i don't see any reason why to deny it tonight mayor okay thank you mayor um is there a way to find out i mean if we're pushing this back to the next voting meeting to at least you know verify that that maybe it's been resolved or that the uh um statute that doesn't allow this is being changed you know i mean i don't i don't know how to know know whether that's correct or not so um is there a way to know i mean we could table it and still protest it in two weeks if that's what we decide we want to do if that's that timeline works for whatever it is you were talking about mr bailey mayor and council i i i'm looking at what's been provided in the staff report and i don't see anything with regard to a due date however i note that if we are going to be protesting within two weeks there wouldn't i don't i i think we would for the most part be okay if you want to continue it for two weeks but nothing greater than two weeks and that's just because you we don't want to send a message that it's deemed denied because we're not considering it and what we can do is send information to the department of lakers saying that we are considering it in due course and we had a couple extra questions if that's the desire of the council mayor i believe that we should uphold the finding of our staff on this issue i the number of liquor licenses granted or in the area have no bearing on this because that's not the reason for the protest the protest is because of a of a gaming device yes it has since been removed but as mr st john stated they did not receive immediate cooperation from the proprietor of the business i would think that if they are willing to um ignore this issue what other other issues down the road will they also skirt i believe it shows a habit and practice and pattern of disregard for certain rules and regulations and i believe in upholding in this case the recommendation of staff so i would recommend that we support staff on this and recommend protest thank you mayor mayor thank you um perhaps mr bailey can answer the what is the effect of our uh recommendation or recommendation to deny is it does it have any is it definitive or is it a recommendation that is just considered by the the commission mayor and council as a matter of practice and we haven't sent them but historically we haven't sent any in the recent years but my understanding of the practice and my historical experience is that is that well first and foremost from a legal perspective is we do not the city does not issue the liquor license we just issue a recommendation so even with a recommendation for a denial or a recommendation to challenge it that does not mean that that is what's going to happen at the state level it's just our recommendation so noting that that the the outcome of the liquor license is not definitive tonight if we say yes or no mayor thank you mr bailey so the applicant has a opportunity to to present its case and get a full hearing in front of the department of liquor licenses and control and that being the case i would be and based on what we've heard from our deputy city manager i would be comfortable in going with the staff recommendation to for denial and let the department of liquor licenses and controls hash it out all right any other discussion okay thank you like i can't hear what you're saying you come back up to the podium could i address some of the comments maybe i could take your i'm sorry could i address some of the comments that were made as the applicant can go ahead the first thing i would say is that okay you have to talk louder or pull the microphone closer to your mouth or something fine there you go now we're talking uh for the time in which the city has to file a protest so if there's an additional investigation that somebody would like to do or perfectly fine with that one other thing i'd like to note is that the department of gaming has actually never indicated or identified that these are illegal gaming devices that's something that's being adjudicated now with the manufacturer something called integrity gaming out of utah and they've never been issued a notice of violation from the department of gaming that the that the applicants are completely innocent in this matter that they were informed by the gaming manufacturer and the actual owner of the games that they were legal they were told by the department of gaming that they were not and so they interfaced back with the owner the owner gave them a thick packet of things saying these are actually legal under arizona state law and then when the city of glendale police department came in and said so to to step back the department of gaming never followed up with them once they never came back and said these are illegal you have to remove them they never got correspondents in the department of gaming all they knew is that the owner told them that they were legal and could be maintained there when they heard from the city of glendale police department that they were not legal they immediately turned them off put them in the back the owner kept telling them that they were legal and they said look this is a dispute between you and the department of gaming you guys work it out amongst yourselves when it's all resolved maybe we'll revisit it but we want to get our liquor license and we want to be in compliance with the law so that's what happened in this case they've done nothing wrong they've not been adjudicated doing anything wrong and the gaming device is not even determined to be illegal yet so i just don't think that's a basis to deny to file a protest and just to clarify what the process is if there is a protest from the from the city all that really means is that the liquor board will hear it instead of it being administratively reviewed by the department of liquor right okay thank you very much okay thank you okay that was the only speaker card i had so we are mr st john's looking for your attention no i knew where that was motion for the consent agenda right well i believe item 11 is being pulled yeah that was pulled to be heard separate uh he hasn't asked for it yet but okay yeah i'll make a motion actually it wasn't pulled it was it i simply had a card for them to speak on it item 11 is being pulled for discussion okay but i can make the motion if you're ready um that was item number four yeah go ahead okay all right mayor i move uh approval of consent agenda items four through 10 and 12 through 14 and consent resolutions 15 through 21. second okay you've heard the motion from councilmember thomachoff a second from councilmember clark is there any discussion hearing none all in favor please vote any opposed please say nay you guys have it do you have what that motion carries okay so item 11 mr aldome you wanted that heard separately yes sir thank you item 11. authorization to enter into amendment 1 to the professional service agreement with j-2 engineering and environmental llc to provide design and construction administration services for the splash pad at o'neill park mayor members of the council here to provide staff report is city engineer david beard mayor city council this is a request for city council to authorize the city manager to enter into an amendment one to the professional services agreement with j2 engineering and environmental design llc in an amount not to exceed 65 334.65 for design and construction administration services related to the splash pad at o'neill park this is a new request amount together with the current not to exceed amount is 155 000 334 and 65 cents in december of 2019 council authorized j2 to start the first phase of the design for the splash pad at o'neill park the agreement included a phased architectural design service for the o'neill splash pad project the phase one scope included development of 90 design construction documents for a new splash pad in the site of the former pool and bath house the scope of services proposed for phase two includes the final design of the splash pad bid and award services and construction administrator support services this concludes my presentation i can answer any questions good thank you mayor mr beer thank you for your presentation so a couple questions the first question is um where was the hang up since we approved this back december in 2019 and we're not at 99 drawings yet can can you or somebody on your team explain why it took so long from december to now to get this far mayor uh council members i i can i'm gonna bring parks director up jim burke but thank you to uh they presented the project in december i'll let them walk through the design process so if i may so before you move on it sounds like there's two phases here parks and recreation had a piece of it and then handed it off to you and before you move on can you tell us what piece of it you had or how long did it stay with you the the first phase of the project was to bring the design to 90 okay and the second phase of the project is to do the final 10 or final drawings or what we're presenting today which is the final 10 percent bid and award services and then construction administration services okay thank you thank you david members of council that original contract for ninety thousand dollars to take us to ninety percent we brought in uh december of 2019 we anticipated that to be 180 day contract and it made that schedule so when we turned it over to engineering we were pretty much on schedule and then they're bringing it to you in this meeting instead of the first meeting and the last meeting of the fiscal year that's what the only delay we've had i don't remember mayor if i may i don't remember remember us saying that it was going to be a 180-day process so we granted you 180 days for that project and you're saying you met it that's mayor members of council mr aldama yes that was our estimate in the scope of work that would take the contractor 180 days to do the design to that level thank you for then i have another question um granted we were in a pandemic so you just can't get out to the community remind me that was there a process within yours your department that you were going to reach out to community members on ideas of what we were going to do with the splash pad and any other amenities uh mayor members of the council councilman aldon know we did not do community outreach this evolved over a couple of fiscal years budget discussions with the council about demolishing the old pool there if you i don't remember the exact date but we got a cdbg grant we brought that to the council that went through cdag and came and we've been working on that process that's almost all complete there's a little bit of work still to be done to get that wrapped up it should be done by october excuse me and then this contract that david's taking forward the contract design contract will be done i think in january or the end of this year and then the construction can begin next year next calendar year excuse me thank you uh mayor if i may so and then the next uh mr burke thank you very much then uh mr beard can you tell us what the schedule is going forward we're going into fall now so when do you project that the project will begin and and when will it be ready for use mayor city council the project timeline is to have the 100 drawings submitted to the city by the end of october and then at that point we need to send it through building services for the billing permit so i anticipate by the end of october we will have that and we can at that point either use a joc or put it out for bid for construction and each of those has their pluses and minuses joc would be the fastest and we we anticipate six to nine months for construction so six months would put us into summer which would be good the following year nine months would put us past that so i i'd like to see it done on time for that the following summer yes mayor yes mayor city council the the the one hang up that we have is the equipment so there's some long lead item equipment and when i say six to nine months that's the that's the variance that we're seeing is the time to order that equipment mayor if i may yeah so there's some lead time on that i get it what would not be good is that if we finished it and then we had to wait all the way through the fall winter for another summer so it would sit there vacant so um thank you i yield to the accounts if they had any questions thank you mayor my questions were answered so any other questions okay thank you okay is there a motion to approve uh mayor i move approval of the authorization uh and to entertain amendment to the professional services agreement with j2 engineering second and most from council member tom trump second councilmember o'donnell to approve the recommended action any discussion hearing none roll call vote council member obama how do you vote aye councilmember clark how do you vote uh council member hugh how do you vote all right council member tommy trump how do you vote aye councilmember turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote hi chair boat side motion carries unanimous moving on to bids and contracts mrs bower would you read or introduce item number 22 please award rfp 20-41 an authorization to enter into an agreement with canopy llc for electronic resources i have no speaker cards no sir okay anybody need an explanation on that okay can i get a motion here right i move we award rfp 20-41 and authorize the city manager to enter into the described agreement with canopy second motion council member turner second councilmember tom chop to prove the recommended action any discussion on a motion yes mayor go ahead as this might happen in practice the this and the following item are five-year contracts i do not believe that they are appropriate there were 15 respondents it certainly is a hot market for that kind of service and i believe that it is the type of contract for customary and usual services that should be awarded more often thank you mayor thank you okay so we had our discussion we'll do a roll call vote council member i'll dominate you vote aye councilmember clark how do you vote nay councilmember hugh how do you vote all right council member tom trump how do you vote aye that's member turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote hi chair votes eye the motion does carry moving on to item 23 please award rfp 20-41 and authorization to enter into an agreement with overdrive for electronic resources any speaker cards no sir okay any questions from the council hearing none can i get a question please mayor would i move that we approve item number 23 rfp 20-41 second emotional council member vice mayor melner second councilmember hughes approved recommended action any discussion on a motion hearing none councilmember o'donnell how do you vote aye councilmember clark how do you vote nay councilmember hugh how do you vote all right council member tommy trump how do you vote aye councilmember turner how do you vote hey excuse me hi sorry council vice mayor how do you vote you get me okay terrible side motion does security uh could we introduce item 24 please authorization to enter into a linking agreement with torrent resources inc for dry well maintenance installation and repair services okay any speaker cards no sir thank you and council any questions very none can i get a motion anybody at all um mayor i move that we approve item number 24 as presented second okay a motion provided by vice mayor second from council member clark to approve the recommended action is there any discussion on this motion hearing none roll call vote council member old domination aye announcement member clerk how do you vote hi councilmember hugh how do you vote hi councilmember tommy trump how do you vote hi councilmember turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote hi chair of outside motion does carry unanimous public hearing land development actions we'll now move on to just that mrs barr would you introduce item 25 resolution number r 20-99 a resolution of council the city of glendale maricopa county arizona amending the general plan map of the city of glendale arizona by approving general plan amendment gpa 19-10 for property located at the southeast corner of glendale avenue and 83rd avenue ordinance number o 20-55 an ordinance of the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona rezoning property located at the southeast corner of glendale avenue and 83rd avenue from nsc neighborhood shopping center to pad planned area development for a development plan entitled g83 plaza amending the zoning map providing for an effective date and directing the city clerk to record a certified copy of the ordinance mayor members of the council here to provide staff report this evening is george gellard he's our senior planning project manager mayor council good evening george gaylord once again um sitting for excuse me sitting in for lisa collins the planning administrator the case before you is g83 which is a mixed-use plan area development specifically two items a general plan amendment 19-10 and zoning change z01 1905. uh this is a vicinity map depicting the location of the property it's about three miles northwest of city hall it's located at the inside corner i should say the southeast corner of excuse me northern have and um 83rd ave no london corrections glendale avenue and 83rd avenue glendale southeast corner southeast corner correct there are two parts to the request the first one is the general plan amendment from planned commercial to corporate commerce center as well as a rezone from neighborhood shopping center nsc to the planned area development pid to allow for a mixed-use planetary development the applicant is john froelke excuse me urban planning uh john from urban planning llc the project area is 8.23 acres it's depicted before you is a portion of the general plan map adopted by the city of glendale designating the project site as planned commercial this is a depiction of the zoning on the property and the adjacent properties neighborhood shopping center is the current zoning there are residentially zoned properties to the north east and south a single family to the north multi-family to the east and south areas to the northwest and west are zoned commercially at this point a little better depiction of the site properties vacant at this time once again you can see kind of the development plant pattern and the residential development that occurs northeast and south of the site again northwest and west those are all commercially zoned properties this is a depiction of the site plan for you what you're looking at there is a multi-family project on the east half of the site 88 multi-family units on a little over five acres at a density of 17.4 units to the acre the planetary development also calls for retail development at the hard corner 15 15 000 square feet on 1.2 acres and a 5000 square foot commercial on 1.2 acres to the southwest portion of the site that may also include some hotel lodging also also depicted on the screen are three red asterisks depicting the the current um proposed access locations this is something that's still being worked out with the transportation department these are some elevations that have been provided in support of the request these are the residential elevations concept for the residential elevations concept for the possible lodging facilities hotels and and for the the retail portion of the site as far as public involvement with this request there was an initial notice mailed out in may 13 of 2019 last year to property owners within 300 feet of the project boundary and other interested parties the that was followed by a neighborhood meeting at westgate at the hampton inn i believe the request has since been advertised this the hearing this evening has been advertised uh and posted um may 14th to 2020. we've also mailed hearing notices regarding the quest may 17th to 2020. uh we received one comment in support of the project there should also be a citizen participation plan attached to your packet the detailing the public involvement portion staff finds the request is consistent with the glendale glendale general plan that it complements adjacent development at westgate encourages inbuilt in a greater variety of land uses housing types and design staff is therefore recommending approval of gpa 1910 and zone 01 1905 subject to the following one site plan dated may 1st of 2020 and elevations dated may 1st to 2020 that they are considered conceptual and are subject to final design review approval two the applicant shall work with city's transportation department to resolve the design location number of access points to the site the number of access points the width of the access and design of the driveway shall adhere to the city of glendale's engineering standards three the applicant shall submit a traffic impact study at the time of design review submittal the study shall be performed in accordance with the procedures and requirements of the mcdot traffic impact study manual four the developers shall provide the half street right away dedication along glendale avenue and 83rd avenue with all associated roadway improvements that are listed in the city of glendale's engineering standards five to 12 kilovolt power lines along 83rd avenue shall be placed underground six a minor light division shall be required if buildings are to be developed over the lot lines seven the developer shall record a notice to prospective purchasers of the proximity to glendale municipal airport in order to disclose the existence and operational characteristics of the airport to future property excuse me owners or tenants of the property eight design review will be required mr mayor that concludes my presentation all right thank you questions from the council no questions from the council public hearing is required so we'll have a public hearing is now open on item 25 resolution r2099 ordinance 020-55 i have no speaker cards on this item anyone in the audience wishing to speak seeing none public hearing is now closed you have a motion on resolution or 20-99 on item 25. uh yes mayor i will make a motion and then i ask to make some comments regarding the project i move that let me find the right place i move we adopt resolution number 20-99 second we have a motion councilmember clark the second council member of mailer to approve the recommended action any discussion on emotion yes ma'am at this time i have presented all of council and senior staff with my remarks regarding this item and i would like to read them into the record the public record so you will please bear with me this proposal is located at the southeast corner of 83rd avenue and glendale avenue it has remained a vacant parcel for at least 15 years due to the owner's inability to acquire any users for this site as of this date despite their request for a general planned amendment and rezoning the owner still has no end user end users the owner is request requesting carte blanche approval for a variety of uses on this site with no assurance that the conceptual plan offered will actually become a reality now i have no objection to a change in the general plan and then zoning that's requested as long as there is more specificity with regard to the permitted uses on this site if this site can be successfully developed it may well provide the impetus for the redevelopment of the northeast corner and the northwest corner of this intersection i then provided some pictures for council showing all four relevant corners which i will not share with the public i go on to state i welcome the development of this corner for commercial usage i am pleased to see activity occurring at this site however i do have concerns in the conceptual site plan about which the owner freely states the conceptual plan could change dramatically as no end users have been identified i support his request for the concept of a hotel retail pads but the problem is that the accommodation appears to have been made for only four retail pads with the majority of the entire site 61 of the total of 8.2 acres or 5.05 acres being designated for a four-story multi-family apartment complex i would bring to your attention that directly south of the site is the san belino multi-family complex it is two stories in height and contains 180 units a four-story multiple family complex is not appropriate for this site it is certainly not compatible with the surrounding area and certainly not in terms of heights heights greater than two stories have been deliberately and specifically earmarked for the westgate area proper i would also bring to your attention that over four thousand multifamily units are either already constructed under construction or planned for the westgate zone hero area that is the appropriate location for mass intensity and i will support concepts that create that mass in density in the westgate zonero area as i have demonstrated in past decisions i have no objection to multifamily in west glendale when appropriately cited to support the west the success of westgate mr froak the applicant's representative made the following representations at the planning commission meeting of june 4th 2020 when questions about the multifamily were raised by planning commissioner nowakowski and i quote what mr froak said quote in all likelihood there will be no residential component unquote and quote the applicant would agree to stipulations to reduce the amount of multi-family unquote so with regard to those representations his representations regarding multi-family on this site i'm going to offer two stipulations directly related to this concept stipulation number one any multi-family constructed on this site shall be no more than two stories in height so mayor before i go on to stipulation two or three do you want to take them one up one by one how do you want to i think just present your whole case and then let's okay second stipulation multifamily can comprise no more than 40 percent of the developable land on this site i would also state that since there is a circle k convenience store and gas station directly across the street from this site it does not appear to be appropriate or logical to encourage an identical use i will therefore offer a third stipulation and that third stipulation would be the conditional land uses of gasoline sales slash convenience stores will not be permitted on this site that ends my remarks so in addition to making that the motion for approval i also offer those three stipulations mayor okay good i'd like to hear from the applicant on these developments good evening mayor and council um john frock i live in the cholla district in glendale offices in phoenix on 28th drive we come here tonight with a site that's been vacant for literally for decades from roughly 1985 to about 2005 it was multi-family the current property owner who's not here tonight he's local rezoned the site to nsc the existing zoning neighborhood shopping center i think this is the only site in glendale that zoned nsc one of the restrictions with nsc is that you have to develop the site with 50 of the site or no development occurs and so the the property owner for about 15 17 years has tried to find users with respect to councilmember clerk's comment that we don't have any users we actually do now the planning commission hearing was about two months ago the property owner has the property owner an escrow to a developer i'm not at liberty to disclose who that developer is they also were local they bring a wealth of existing development experience to the table they do have end users that they are bringing as part of the escrow to for the property my client he's an investor and doesn't really develop property he tries to get sites positioned where they can be brought to market and developed we do have the full support of planning commission staff recommendation of approval we agree with the eight stipulations um literally about an hour ago i was made aware of the stipulations that councilman clark read out loud we cannot live with those we feel like we've done the neighborhood work mr gayler mentioned the neighborhood meeting that we had last year with david williams i was there my client was there we have full neighborhood support we've we fielded a couple calls with adjacent property owners that are anxious to see the property develop we'd like to agree with the staff recommendation the planning commission recommendation and the eight stipulations that were are part of the powerpoint and with respect to what was said at the planning commission meeting that was a attempt if you will to try to maybe lower the density lower the height i should say on on the multi-family component we're only looking at 88 dwelling units it's not like it's what you see at westgate or at xan hero with um very high density multi-family these this project will be high quality it'll meet all of the standards that are required by the city through design reviews so tonight we would we would ask that we received the general plan amendment approval and zoning approval subject stipulations recommended by staff and also by the planning commission questions from the council thank you mayor mr fro so you did i understand that you've received no opposition from any of the neighborhood meetings mayor and council member correct so we had the neighborhood meeting at westgate like like george indicated we've done additional notification um kind of midway through the project our mistake we we only posted the property at one location uh i think around memorial day we we added an additional posting signs and since then i have received one phone call i think the same individual that was calling me as the applicant was calling the mayor's office i've offered to meet with her she has not taken me up on that um offer to kind of explain what we're trying to accomplish on the property but that's a long answer the question we've not received any opposition we will have a lot of landscaping a lot of building setbacks and a lot of landscape buffers for the project when it goes through a design review and is developed that's all i have thank you mayor um i would like to i mean of these three items i would like to kind of talk a little bit more about them mr frog if you could uh uh maybe answer some of these questions regarding the multi-family uh the objection was it that it's it could be up to four stories is that kind of what the plan is at current uh to go up to four stories and how close are is that building to existing single-story family uh residential units mayor councilmember malnor could is there a way to flip to the site plan the particular slide thank you it's a little deceiving because the the way the architect laid out the site plan north is actually to the left of the screen i'm sorry about that so the multi-family component which is depicted on the slide 88 units the nearest single family is going to be north of glendale avenue as councilmember clark indicated to our south and then to our east property line which would be at the top of the sheet are duplexes which are single story the way that is laid out and again it's very conceptual because we do not have a final oh thank you thank you brent so this is the duplexes councilmember milner the single family is way over here north of glendale avenue there's a landscape median george indicated some of the access points we are aligning we're not asking for any median breaks so we'll have landscaping on glendale avenue with the landscape median the glendale avenue frontage we will have a landscape buffer on all the perimeter and then the existing a car apartment complex that councilman clark indicated would be to the south so if you look at the north arrow it's pointed to the left of the screen so the nearest single family is really up in here which would be a few hundred feet to the north there is some single family further east of the site but frankly i don't think that if the site develops with any multi-con family component which we don't think it will based on market conditions we don't think that this site would be visible from the single family neighborhoods to the east if we went to the is it possible to go over to the aerial photo backwards i do that so here's an aerial photo of the site here single family there's an abandoned gas station that is not part of this application has been abandoned for about 15 years frankly this property on the northwest corner that's one of our neighbors we know him he talked to me last year when we had the neighborhood meeting he's in support of what we're doing the gas station that was referenced is off the corner which is rare that's here with a drugstore on the corner our site multi-family one of the things that was asked by the transportation department early on was to abandon this is the lamar road alignment which is the first major street south of glendale avenue we have abandoned that so there will not be a road back in there where it frankly it's if the road was there it might be a little bit difficult to defend the space if you will with um not really knowing what people might be doing back in you there these are the duplexes i mentioned apartments more duplexes self storage that's a care facility and so the nearest single family home comes from malnour is down here on ocato which is about a quarter mile south of the site if i'm a mayor how close are they to the duplexes the duplexes would be here the if the site were designed and approved with this configuration the distance from here to the duplexes would be about 175 feet additional questions may or if i may um the the other objection was about the gasoline station having an additional convenience store um with one already there what would be your objection to not having that stipulation our our preference would be to have a financial institution on the corner that particular end user i i can't get up here in front of council and the public and say that we're going to have a financial institution on the corner the fact that there's a vacant gas station across the street with two billboards on the property and it's frankly it's been a pretty unsightly property for quite a while we would prefer to have the flexibility if the council wants to add a requirement that we are required to have a conditional use permit for gas sales and convenience store we would certainly agree to that okay and the the last item council member clark recommended was the 40 developable land uh to no more than 40 percent in multi-family so what what percentage do you under this proposal that you have now it's council member clark said is about 60 is that accurate mayor councilmember uh malnar the the exhibit that's part of the slide in part of the packet again we're only looking at 88 units it's only on 5 acres in the 17.4 units the acre that's for probably 25 years that's been the sweet spot for glendale in terms of multi-family properties that i've noticed that have gotten approved recently are a lot higher density do we need four story on the site probably not we could probably live with the three-story height limit the the site plan or the some of the renderings that were provided are illustr illustrative in nature the one is showing four story we probably would not because the site is so small would probably not render four-story apartment buildings to directly answer your question councilman melnar um five acres out of eight acre site i'm not the best mathematician i probably 50 of the site is shown as multi-family the apartment or the hotel that we're hoping to locate should it locate on the site would probably be here and then the multi-family would go away very good that's all the questions i have mayor mr frog uh i'm glad you admitted you're not a good mathematician because in your narrative you state that 61 of the site will be consumed by this apartment complex it's not my words i didn't do the math on it you all did now i hear talk like it's only five acres yeah it's only five acres of an eight acre site so in essence the majority of the site will be consumed by apartments you can't you keep saying um a couple of things that bother me one is that well we don't think apartments are really going to come to this site well if you don't think so why are you fighting so hard to make sure that you do have multifamily approved on this site number one number two you say that your client has it in escrow to a developer well does that developer have any end users are any of those end users multi-family no okay well then then why the adherence the insistence on improving this plan with multi-family it's not logical also with regard to the conditional use permit for a gas station and convenience store i put that in there because in your application you are already granted unless i put the stipulation in you are already granted conditional use permit for a gas station in a convenience store that is why i put the specific stipulation three in to remove that um i to me i i appreciate what you're doing i appreciate what the property owner is doing the property owner until that land is sold is doing speculative zoning and wants all options open to get the best deal possible for that site and and quite frankly it's being done on the backs of people who live in the area you say well across the street there's residential yes there is residential and they're zoned r17 they're not a typical 5000 or 6000 square foot lot and they're going to be looking at a four-story apartment complex that doesn't seem quite appropriate san bellino which is the apartment complex to the south is only two stories and those people are going to have the benefit of looking at a four-story apartment complex directly to their north it's out of scale and out of character for the area to keep insisting on a four-story apartment and same for a three-story which is again why i offered the stipulation for a two-story apartment complex so i'm really concerned in in your representations well we don't ever think multi-family is ever going to come there and yet you're you're fighting like heck to make sure multi-family is is approved within this project it doesn't make sense it's not logical so i am asking that if we are going to grant you speculative zoning there's got to be some limits and i am asking for the limit of a two-story apartment complex on less than 50 percent of the site on 40 percent of the site and remove a competing conditional use permit which is a gas station and a convenience store which is dir one or the other gets killed off either you're going to kill off circle k or circle k is going to kill off whoever tries to locate on that site again it's not logical it doesn't make sense you're welcome never sponsor mayor councilmember clark i'm not up here to argue with you or anybody else on the council if i had a room full of people that were concerned with a truck stop or a bunch of multi-family that somebody didn't like we would be we would have negotiated that and and compromised before tonight i go to a neighborhood meeting last year no opposition i've got neighborhood support the r17 folks are 400 feet away 500 feet away separated by a major arterial street the reason the multi-family is there is because the zoning requires that you have a residential component and that's why it's there if the multi-family doesn't happen we have the fallback provision where the hotel would satisfy the paper requirement for the zoning for the residential component through lodging so again if i had a 20 people here or five people that were concerned with the project we would have worked with staff and and would have tried to work this out but i don't like to negotiate at the podium i got your stipulations about an hour ago and i'd rather fall back on what you suggested on the liquor license were go with the staff recommendation in this case the planning correct planning commission recommendation for approval mr mayor may i respond the reference to the truck stop is beneath you john but i'll let that one go secondly i believe we met at least on one occasion and perhaps more on this very project and at that time i conveyed to you in no uncertain terms that i didn't believe apartments were appropriate for this site and you represented to me at that time that that was not the plan so i was very surprised when i finally saw this conceptual in the packet that shows a plan that includes multi-family and that's that's all that i have to say thank you any other comments mayor thank you mayor uh so mr folk i guess is the forced i mean i getting the idea ideally the it's going to be a hotel and a hotel with a two-story hotel there obviously wouldn't work either right so i mean the height would be would work for either the multi-family which i i'm guessing probably the density is needed for the for it to pencil out financially for the project mayor um councilmember thomas off correct we it's a free market society that's what this state believes in we're private property rights state i've got a client that's sat on the property now for 17 years that can't do anything with it i spoke to him a few hours ago he was going to be here tonight to discuss some of the past conversations that he has had with the city with councilmember clark we agreed just to have me come down here and and represent the item again i don't i can't represent that the site's not going to develop as multi-family because i want to be truthful and honest with the council and with the neighborhood is i don't know it's in the best interest of the developer to leave their options open um and mayor i mean and respectfully joyce there there's literally no opposition there's there's no we haven't received any emails we haven't received any phone calls nobody expressed opposition and the site i i can't imagine the neighbors want the site to remain vacant for more years so um when i've walked the site i've picked up debris um it's you know it's not really doing the community much good like i said before what we're going to do [Music] when the site develops and hopefully someday it will it will be nice we're going to work out all of the transportation components access points the median break was set up to serve the site and so we're going to continue to work with the staff and and we will work with the neighborhood as needed once we do end up with final users so is this speculative zoning yeah to some extent it is but we can't live with the existing zoning and like i said before as part of the presentation the site was multi-family for the entire eight acres and in good faith the owner agreed to the rezoning years ago and and tried to find users and nobody was willing to develop 50 of the site in phase one with financing and things of that nature so we feel like that we've worked with the neighborhood really closely and we will continue to work with staff and with the neighborhood and try to make this a high quality project for for the city mayor do you have anything else if i could respond just uh with regard to council member talonchop as as you know there's a 300 foot notification which means the walgreens the ella's bar the owner of the vacant gas station would have been most likely the only people notified i did not raise this as an issue with my constituency because i had relied upon representations that there was no multi-family coming and only was aware of it when when we got the packets so um that may be the reason why you haven't heard from the neighbors regarding this project wanna respond microphone i'm i'm sure that the the site's posted with the public hearing notices though correct do you want to answer yes the site is posted and we do send out hearing notices to everyone within 300 feet um about three weeks before the hearing um mr froak has also contacted the neighbors over the course of time on at least two two occasions or three it was about halfway through the process we decided that a um an amendment to the the general plan would be warranted um as well as the zone change so we re-advertised and they sent out new notices to that effect so there's there's been ample modification all right thank you thank you mayor um well having listened to the discussion so far i'm i'm left with this it's uh it's been a obviously a parcel under its current zoning that's been undevelopable there's not been a market demand for it it's an eyesore in the neighborhood it's an eyesore on our name street our main thoroughfare glendale avenue it doesn't represent well our whole community and people transitioning between downtown and westgate the neighbors have no objection to it as proposed the planning commission approved it as proposed and the planning staff has approved it as proposed with the stipulations that are included in our packet and then the three additional stipulations today in my estimation only make it harder to develop not easier and i think this is a parcel we'd like to see get developed even with a four-story a small number of uh four-story apartments there it still conforms to that planning standard of of uh transitional density if commercial then you have some four-story apartments and you have some two-story apartments and some duplexes and then you finally get into single-family neighborhoods so it's transitional they're not a budding um a single-family neighborhood i think this i can support this project the way that's been proposed by the applicant and the way that staff and planning commission have sent it to us mayor thank you mayor um i can support councilmember clark on items one and two number three i'm not too sure that i can i'm okay with the competition of two gas stations there especially being mr froak mentioned that the gas station across the street on the west side is not even on the corner it's further to the south i think a gas station should be in the corner anyways my personal opinion i can support councilmember clark's request for the um two-story and less than uh 40 percent um the third one i i'm probably not there but i do agree that four stories is is not a project that should go there i am happy to see uh talks about this vacant property that's been there for years but i'll leave it at that i can support one and two my turn i guess all right i'll talk um i would like to offer a compromise for item one and make it a three-story uh i think our applicant said that they could live with a three-story and that's a compromise uh i know what i agree with councilmember aldama i think having worked with large commercial convenience stores and gas stores in the past they do a lot of work before they put one of those in they really know whether or not there's a market and i don't think anybody's going to put one in unless they know that there's a market and so it either will or will not go in but i think there'll be a market there and so i'd agree with the councilmember aldama to strike item three and item two i'd compromise and move that up to fifty percent uh which is what the applicant said that that it would be um and i could live with those two stipulations you have anything to add yeah well mary i'd like to know if council member clark agrees with ray's stipulations i i would be willing to compromise on one of them but not both i'd either like to see stipulation one remain two stories and fifty percent or stipulation one three stories forty percent take your pick mayor actually i'd like mr frog to come back that's what i was going to ask you is let's ask can we ask mr frog do you think that you guys would have an issue if you compromise from a four to a three story is that doable mayor and council again my client's not here but given the conversation tonight yeah we could drop it to from four to three and the reason i personally don't have a problem with three is because there's two stories right next so it's a gradual step down it's not this grand noticeable difference which i think is what councilmember clark original concern was me personally the 50 40 i just want it to work i don't i wouldn't care if it's 60 or 30 as long as it comes in and conforms to our standards gives us proper access to uh the apartments if there's a fire police need to get in that type of thing but if it's maintained and and no more than 88 units that would be my concern is it it's topped off at 88 units with three story that that would be what i would prefer to see as far as the gas station is 25 by going down one story though so the dens less well i'm talking about yeah acreage right but it impacts you're still using the same amount of acreage that isn't going to change correct correct mayor of the and council we could live with the three-story um i don't know what to do with the percentage the 40 percent um i guess we'd have to say we could not support that in three um mr frog i would compromise on fifty percent as suggested we could live with fifty percent three i'd prefer we actually just prefer the eight stipulations like i said but we could add the two stipulations and drop the third one regarding the cup as councilmember melnar indicated the market's gonna decide if somebody really wants to put a gas station on this corner the site on the northeast corner with the the abandoned gas station and the sea store and the billboards they closed for whatever reason i don't know but it's been been in that condition for a long time right and i don't know if anybody remembers but inside that gas station on the northeast corner there actually used to be a taco bell inside a lot of people may not remember that so for whatever reason i don't know i think it's a great location but it's never came back maybe the price is too high i don't know thank you mary yes um i'm not comfortable with it with changing the percentage i mean if we if if the if you're uh developers willing to go three stories they lose 20 they lose 25 so they go from 88 to 66 units anyway so how are they gonna and then if they lose space they're gonna have they're gonna i mean it the project may not work so i i feel like a three story is a fair compromise anyway and leaving it at the five acres i think that's reasonable because it has to make financial sense for the developer to pursue it that's why the the parcel is vacant mayor um but i think mr fro thought said that 50 would be okay that's correct my understanding 50 percent would be four mr probably indicated that he could support three stories and 50 percent that's what he said we'd be okay with that okay so they would be all right they would be closer together probably the same number of units though probably not as desirable of a project that's my biggest the developer's representative said that they would accept 50 and we compromised more and struck out number three so i i think it's a done deal all right well my point is if you're going to try to cram 66 units on four acres it's going to be quite tight um and not as nice of a project that's my that was the point i'm trying to make it may not it may make they may work financially for the developer i'm sure they probably wouldn't be happy about it but i just don't think it would be as nice of a project on four acres as it would be on five acres mayor and councilmember thomas you bring up an excellent point if we did have the 5.05 acres it gives us more room for landscaping storm water retention parking that that's like i said a moment ago to councilman clark prefer about not negotiate at the podium we thought we had worked this out with planning commission a couple months ago that's the you're going to end up with apartments in a parking lot if you if you go to 50 that's may i may or may i state that there are certain guidelines and standards that even apartments have to comply with that require a certain amount of landscaping etc whether it's on four acres or 6 acres or 10 acres i think rather that you assume that it will retain the same amount of density i am assuming that it will have to reduce the density to accommodate the guidelines and standards of the city of glendale for development so we're coming at this from two different angles may or would i mayor what i'm saying is the the the lower density may not make financial sense for the developer and then the parcel remains vacant well so council member telling tough i i would just read it away in a conversation i had with mr pro prior to this meeting before the meeting started even then he was still representing that there probably wouldn't be apartments at this site i don't know what's going on at this point but i i do believe that if apartments are this site should not be consumed predominantly by apartments this site was always intended to provide neighborhood retail four neighborhood retail spots do not cut the mustard we want to encourage as much retail on this site as possible we have plenty of apartments in west glendale so all i can say is that i don't think it's appropriate to consume over 60 percent of the site with apartments leaving very few retail pads and maybe maybe a hotel but we don't even know that for sure so mayor what what if we said if they're willing to do the 50 for the multifamily but if they're if they if it ends up being a hotel that they can have the density but council member tamachov i never objected to a four-story hotel i think in my stipulation okay hold it one at a time in my stipulation i specifically stay any multi-family constructed on this site shall be no more than two stories there's no reference to the hotel okay when i made the original stipulation mayor i moved the question which i think we now have we had a motion in a second she then gave her stipulations i would make the motion that we amend a remove stipulation three that we amend the stipulation one to three stories and stipulation two to fifty percent and a vote uh on that okay we have a motion we have a second and that's with the stipulations everybody understand the stipulations can you can you re-read the stipulations mr yeah so the stipulation one would be any multi-family construction on this site shall be no more than three stories in height number two multi-family can comprise no more than 50 of the developer land on this site okay any other discussion hearing none roll call vote point of order your stipulations aren't going to be placed in your resolution your stipulations will be placed in the zoning ordinance sorry okay then i will off i i will offer my original motion which is the resolution only and that right i ask that this council approve resolution number r20-99 okay we have had lots of discussion i have a second from mr melner i have a motion from councilmember clark and we will do a roll call vote with councilmember odama how do you vote hi councilmember clark how do you vote aye council member hugh how do you vote all right council member tom trump how do you vote aye councilmember turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote hi chair vote site now moving on to the ordinance 0020-55 with stipulations mr milner um go ahead and make the motion and with the stipulation okay i move we pass and adopt ordinance number 020-55 with the following two stipulations number one any multi-family constructed on this site shall be no more than three stories in height two two no no three she's correct i'm sorry you're messing with me now and and stipulation number two multi-family can comprise no more than 50 percent of the developable land on this site would you want a second yet i'll second that mayor okay so we have a motion on organ02055 with stipulations made by councilmember clark seconded by the vice mayor to prove the recommended action is there any discussion on the motion hearing none enroll call vote council member odama how do you vote aye councilmember clark how do you vote aye councilmember hugh how do you vote all right councilmember tom trump how do you vote aye councilmember turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote i chair about sight that horse is dead okay moving on mr would you introduce item 26 please resolution number r 20-100 a resolution the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona amending the general plan map of the city of glendale arizona by approving general plan amendment gpa 19-08 for property located at the southwest corner of northern avenue and 107th avenue ordinance number o 20-56 an ordinance of the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona rezoning property located at the southwest corner of northern avenue and 107th avenue from cs planned shopping center to pad planned area development for a development plan entitled northern 107 planned area development amending the zoning map providing for an effective date and directing the city clerk to record a certified copy of the ordinance thank you mayor and council once again the item before you is the approval of a general plan amendment and planetary development zoning for a project to be known as northern 107 specifically gpa 1908 and zln 19-18 project site this time is located along northern avenue at the southeast corner of northern and 107th avenue about 8 miles west of city hall the council has taken previous actions regarding this subject site having to do with annexation of the property it was part of a council work session on february the 25th we introduced the annexation proposal with the proposed retail and multi-family residential uh project kind of in tandem with that council consensus at that time was to move forward with the annexation process there was a council a public hearing on the annexation proposal on april 14th of this year at that time that was basically the review the public review following the following filing of the blank petition which initiates the the process at the city council meeting on june the 9th the annexation was a approved and is in full force in effect at this time it is now part of the city of glendale purpose for the hearing this evening is to consider gpa 1908 which is a an amendment to the city's general plan from medium density residential 5 3.5 to 5 units per acre to a high density residential 20. that is 12 to 20 acres 12 to 20 units per acre and general commercial second request is a zone change from general commercial c2 to planned area development to include commercial uses and a multi-family residential component the request involves a 10-acre parcel again located at 107th ave and northern that proposals multi-family residential and commercial uses it's depicted on screen inside the yellow dots there again this is the southwest corner of northern and 107th to the north is the city of peoria to the west and south are residential areas within maricopa county to the east of the site is the city of glendale this is part of a an area previously outside the city recently annexed designated by the general plan as a medium desert medium density residential uh five units to the acre land use assumptions with regards to plenary development involve either a commercial and residential combination or a commercial only facility the northern 107 plenary development pad zoning approved by the planning commission was approved recommended for approval by the planning commission on may the 7th 2020. uh with regard to fiscal impacts and assumptions regarding the development of the facility there are two options once again one would be a combination commercial and residential facility that would be the lowest range revenue scenario the commercial only would be the highest range and as discussed as part of the annexation proceedings um the uh the different possibilities are mapped out for you here it talks about the revenue stream that would result from the combination of the uses as well as the commercial only use annual net benefit range would fall between 120 0 425 to 292 658 dollars one-time revenues for the residential commercial combo would be 433 000 in construction sales tax versus 235 000 for the commercial only component again this is something that the city council considered as part of the annexation process the site once again depicted here on the screen the southeast corner of northern in 107th backs up to a fairly high density single-family residential community within maricopa county to the west and south this is the site plan that is included as part of the planned area development proposal you can see that it includes a gas station convenience store at the hard corner of northern and 107th interior to the uh the project site actually to the west of the the the gas station they're anticipating a convenience use drive through fast food type use the remainder of the site would be developed as a residential community one-story residential units would be [Music] placed at the west and southern boundaries and in interior to the community would be a series of two-story residential facilities a little better look at the property the landscaping the layout the setbacks just going back i want to point out this is a 15 foot setback along the west boundary as well as a 48 foot setback along the southern boundary that includes a an easement in that location just uh quickly some elevations that have been forwarded um um as part of the anticipated submittal on the circle k at the the hard corner as well as the um the residential development um interior of the community the single families obviously at the top and the excuse me the single story at the top of the screen um the two stories at the bottom of the screen with regard to public involvement the initial notice regarding this proposal was mailed out on march 26 2020 to property owners within 300 feet and other interested parties there was a total of 32 mailings within 300 feet uh the request was advertised the site was posted april the 16th of this year hearing notices were mailed april 17th 2020. there was a neighborhood meeting on march the 11th we have received a written commentary from a representative of the property owners to the west um highlighting some of the issues regarding traffic privacy and noise issues they've also talked at some length about the the possibility that two-story buildings could be placed next to the perimeter of the property this is a one-story residential development next door the developer working with the the owners next door has decided to go with the um the single-story structures along the perimeter and the two stories would be limited to the interior again of the project site through the review by the planning and zoning commission the the total number of units was also reduced from 91 to um i think it was 74. we've got that in the stipulations i'll come back to that with regard to findings staff finds the proposals consistent with the general plan objectives it encourages a mixture of housing types and designs as well as an innovative method for development of an infill property in this location staff is therefore recommending approval of gpa 1908 and 01 1918 subject to the following uh number one development and substantial conformance with the development plan dated april 9th of 2020 to the developer owner of the shopping plaza she'll be responsible for providing and constructing a cmu wall with a minimum of eight feet in height along the property lines that about residential zoning district excuse me eight feet or six feet that's six feet here okay okay i think you said eight feet did i say eight i'm sorry six feet number three a minimum six foot sidewalk will be required along property frontage four um street lighting will be required along property frontage five turnaround areas should be provided for gated driveways six a total of 74 residential units are allowed as opposed to 91. mr mayor that concludes my presentation i'll respond to any questions you may have okay and i'm gonna figure out why my paperwork's showing different numbers in yours mayor yes i want further clarification because it's my understanding mr gerhart that the applicant did agree to an eight foot perimeter wall despite what your your narrative shows tonight and i also want to clarify for any of the public that lives in that area that that i have also received assurances that the applicant will be building one story to the west and to the south abutting the existing residential units that are already there so mr gerhart can you clarify whether it's an eight-foot wall or a six-foot wall you know i was just looking at this and the code book for someone else recently i believe the code standard is eight feet between commercial and residential i believe the applicant agreed to the eight foot yeah i think you're correct so i think that that needs to be corrected within the narrative yeah if i could my confusion here is is my paperwork's showing resolution 020-100 and ordnance020-56 the chart up there says gpa 1918 and 0n 1918 so i'm either reading this wrong or it's wrong on the board i just need to make sure that we we do it correctly where the public's not confused either correct i think it's gpa 1908 i'll have to check that mayor if you read further into it it does say by approving general plan amendment gpa 19-08 under the resolution 1918. that's a mistake oh yeah you seem like that's correct it was in 1918 or 1908. gpa should be 1908. z01 is 1918. well gpa look at your screen it says gpa 1918. yes that's con 1918. okay correct that's an error on the slide i'm sorry okay so right so just just to be clear we are on resolution 020-100 and ordnance 020-56 item number 26 correct yes okay everybody good on that yes okay that that's my main concern then we can make the correction down here lower on the gpa whether it's 08 or 18. you've got that okay okay so with that uh are there any uh questions we're going to do a public hearing next public hearing is now open on item number 26 resolution zero two zero one hundred and ordinance zero two zero five six i have no speaker cards on this issue anyone wishing to speak on this any questions being done hearing none public hearing is now closed can i get a motion on item 26020-100 yes mayor a move we approve resolution 20-100 second i have a motion council member hughes second council member o'donnell to approve the recommended action any discussion on the motion hearing on roll call vote council member o'donnell how do you vote aye council clark how do you vote aye council member hugh how do you vote aye councilmember tom trump how do you vote aye announcement returner how do you vote aye vice mayor how do you vote hi chair outside motion carries unanimous can i get a motion on item 26 ordinance 0-2-0-5-6 yes mayor after approve ordinance 020-56 second i have emotional accounts member hughes second council member tom trump through the recommended action any discussion on this motion harry none roll call vote councilmember oldham how do you vote aye announcement clerk how do you vote aye councilmember hugh how do you vote hi announcement tom trump how do you vote aye councilmember turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote hi sure what side motion carries your name smith bower would you introduce item number two seven resolution 020-101 and ordnance020-57 resolution number r 20-101 a resolution of council the city of glendale maricopa county arizona amending the general plan map of the city of glendale arizona by approving general plan amendment gpa 20-02 for property located at the northwest corner of west bell road and loop 101 ordinance number o 20-57 an ordinance of the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona rezoning property located at the northwest corner of bell road and loop 101 from commercial pad planned area development to residential pad planned area development for a development plan entitled evergreen loop 101 and bell road amending the zoning map providing for an effective date and directing the city clerk to record a certified copy of the ordinance thank you american council um once again the resolution and ordinances pertain to um two separate requests one is a general plan amendment uh 2002 and zone change 2004 having to do with evergreen 101 and bell road pad first of all the request number one is the general plan amendment from offices to high density residential 30 units to the acre and number two a zone change from commercial pid to a residential pad the project size is 16.10 acres the applicant is shane ellman for tiffany and bosco pa representing well formerly glendale bell 101 i understand the name is evergreen 101 and bell site is located at the northwest corner of loop 101 and west bell road it's kind of sandwiched between the 101 and the flood channel for the new river somewhat north of city hall depicted here in the slide the the current general plan designation is is uh for offices the site there is just exactly west of the 101 right at the edge of the on the city boundary this is the zoning map depiction uh the subject property in yellow as previously approved as a planned area development some years ago again that's the loop 101 right away just east of the site and the 83rd avenue kind of wrapping around the property and crossing loop 101 to the south somewhat east of here you can see the detail of the arrowhead mall just for reference once again the property location a portion of the site is encumbered by the fema flood channel for new river corridor again that's you're looking at bell road and the loop 101 and the intersection of the 83rd avenue areas to the northwest are largely residential the rest of the adjacent properties are pretty much commercial um this is the subject property it's tipped counterclockwise north is to the left of the screen that's 83rd avenue that you see at the property frontage this would be the site of the primary access to the site the opposite end there would be a emergency only access at bell road in between you have a kind of a linear parcel it's about a quarter mile long maybe 300 feet wide again you've got one on one on one side and the flood channel to the other you've got four l-shaped buildings four-story structures 60 feet tall 26 units to the acre a total of 418 multi-family units as part of this project with regard to the history of the site it's currently developed excuse me it's currently vacant it was approved as part of a prior planned area development known as palm canyon by the city council in 2009 that was never developed the applicant at this time is arguing basically that this is not a good site for commercial development basically due to the size and shape of the project and you know it's proximity to the wash channel it's difficult to develop in a commercial format this is just a little bit better look at the site you can see the arrowhead mall to the east you can see the access the roadways also to the east 83rd avenue 101 and to the south you can see bell once again kind of a high density residential development site to the northwest the rest of it is commercial initial notice regarding this project was mailed out on april 24th to property owners within 300 feet of the neighborhood of the property there was a neighborhood meeting also on may the 11th proposal site was posted on june the 23rd the hearing request was advertised june the 25th in a glendale star hearing notices were also mailed out on june the 26th there were some comments received there [Music] part of the citizen participation final report that are included in your in your packet as far as findings staff feels the pad proposal would result in a quality development product which is consistent with the goals and objectives of the general plan by offering a variety of housing types or promoting some additional housing variety and developing a basically a difficult info site staff is recommending approval subject to the following stipulations number one the development of the site being substantial conformance to the evergreen loop 101 and bell road pad submittal dated june of 2020. two the modifications to the river need preliminary and final approval from fema there is a conditional letter of map revision clomer that is required by fema prior to development as well as their letter of map revision basically that's where they update the the fema flood maps as a follow-up uh no buildings cfos certificates of occupancy would be obtained until the lawmer is received from fema three implementation of the traffic study under site improvements at the access point from the development onto 83rd avenue intersection including southbound 83rd avenue right turn deceleration lane that would be required a northbound 83rd avenue left turn lane as well left turn out of the site will need to be constructed by the developer requiring modifications to the existing raised median at the north of the site once again the developer will be responsible for the cost of all the required off-site traffic improvements for all half street improvements on 83rd avenue adjacent site would be completed with development of the property five right-of-way improvements include street lights at the property frontage six foot wide sidewalks on arterials an ada accessible route connecting the site to 83rd avenue right away six approval of a minor land division application lot tie to combine all the parcels um there's about seven separate parcels that the site plan overlaps currently they would have to be combined number seven submittal of assigned proposition 207 waiver number eight design review for all physical development associated with the proposal along together with a sound attenuation plan is required by section 7.705 of the city municipal code mr mayor that concludes my presentation if you have any questions i'll be happy to respond questions from the council no one okay we do have one person that wants to speak ken watt if you're next or if you'll come come over here please well he's doing that we do have a public hearing i'm going to go ahead and open that up waiting for him public hearing is now open on item 27 resolution 020101 and ordinance 020-57 mr what if you'll come to the podium if you'd state your name the city you live in you have uh you have the podium sir pull the microphone towards uh close to your mouth so we can hear you you can take your mask off if you need to okay appreciate that first of all my name is ken watt i'm a peoria resident i guess i'm here because you guys invited me somebody invited me the easiest way for me to do this is just to refer you all back if any of you were here in 2016 the billboard fight that we had they wanted to put a billboard behind in the same location general location where this luxury apartment complex wants to go so after a lot of fighting and meetings and so forth the republic paper ran an article that glendale when you came to your conclusion you established a scenic corridor in the area we're talking about and it goes from 51st to bell in addition to that glendale officials created that portion they wanted two different zones so that was what i consider part of your comprehensive plan the first zone was the north which is kind of the word they used was serene and the south is bustling so not that this isn't a nice project i've i've been involved in all the meetings i've talked to the people i've seen the actual plans i'm surprised you said four story the point the last plan we saw at the planning commission was three story for part of them four stories for the other one for two other ones uh in addition i asked at all three meetings how tall is the current commercial buildings allowed to be and i got three stories and i got two stories i also asked for a copy of the traffic report which they took my name and address they did not provide it but today i was guaranteed i was going to get it so bottom line is is that and he was here tonight i mean we still hear mr frog at the time was the director on the city council and he wrote the move and this is his general comment the move was intended to protect the views and preserve the existing washes creeks deserts and hills along the freeway that swoops through the residential arrowhead ranch and hidden manor neighborhoods and then it says that uh also there's six miles that along the 101 that includes peoria and we're part of that so originally the billboard my wife and i in our house were were budding right up against new river the creek the drainage creek they wanted to put that a thousand feet behind our house so what they did was is they made a crane come in and they put the crane up put a big sign and some of you might remember it and that notified all the residents both in glendale and in peoria can you see that from your backyard and john becker the person that ran that offered the glendale residence a thousand dollars if anybody could see it from their backyard he didn't offer that to us and it would shine right into our backyard so again i know this is glendale i'm in peoria but i appreciate the neighborly thoughts and i will tell you that had i known this was going on i would have supported mr becker and he's flashing big light this is four stories it it will overlook our house we're all single residents along that peoria wars there and and probably you all know this but that piece of property we're talking about used to be peoria's and then you glendale and peoria swap those properties out 20 years ago for whatever reason bottom line is is that we oppose it vehemently we have talked to two different law firms i wish more of the people could have been here but to be honest with you the way that the uh people that presented this to us they made it sound like this was like an initial meeting here at city council there would be several public hearings so after i talked to glendale today they said no that there'll be a vote afterwards probably even though it's not required by law so if there's any way to postpone this there are if you say who are the other people you've got all these people just look at the list i know you have access to it of the witnesses who testified in 2016. majority of them want to testify and and put together something to fight it and and they're both glendale and peoria residents so what we're hoping is you vote it down if you don't we're hoping you modify it considerably and if you don't do that if you could delay the vote until we have a chance to put our complete presentation together but that being said the the main concerns that we have are the space itself if you've never been there if i know you've been there but if you go into sam's club and you come out of sam's club and right there to your left is the gas station and you turn right and you go right to union hills we thought it was going to go right across there that's not it you come to that light and you turn left and you head towards bell and when you get to that big hill that comes around and goes down by costco that's where they're going to merge that one entrance all right your time's up sir if you can finish please okay so what we're concerned about is it's four stories and uh we we would like you not to allow four stories and we'd also like you to consider the traffic and the safety issues and the noise issues they don't have any sound wall and our biggest complaint is is this doesn't go with the comprehensive plan of any corridor you established which according to the one attorney is a spot zoning violation which depending on whether you vote this in or not it'll be i guess whether we get a chance to present it if you don't vote tonight if you do vote tonight then if there's any appeal or procedural thing we can do we intend to fight this all the way until we've exhausted every option but i appreciate your time thank you sir anyone else wishing to speak on this item mayor good can we hear from the applicant if they're here if if they feel compelled good evening mayor members of the council shane allman for the record with tiffany in bosco 2525 east camelback road um we're very happy to be here and and very pleased that uh staff um and many of the departments here in the at the city have worked closely with us i do have some slides and presentation materials but what i want what i'd like to do is recognize that i've got bob caravona here representative with evergreen um and we're not just coming and speculating a zoning case at this time and a change in the general plan we do have a developer that is ready to to bring forward a high quality product a three four three to four story multi-family product on the site we've worked close with staff we've worked close to tony abbott and the transportation department to make sure that any traffic issues are resolved the gentleman mr watt that was here to to answer some of his questions about the height we are more than 500 feet away from the residents across the the new river wash and you know when we when we came to the first neighborhood meeting i think there was a misunderstanding that we were going to be perched on this this knoll and overlooking um the neighborhood there and the reality is is that there's a there's a berm there that we have to continue to strengthen and build up through the clomar lomar process with fema and if you look at the site it actually then goes down kind of in a bowl which kind of which makes some of the challenges for commercial development that that haven't come to the site under the the current zoning and general plan that's on there the current proposal before you will happen as soon as as possible i know that fema we have to work through some of those processes with the clomar lomar but evergreen is anxious to to develop the site we provided a lot of quality and detail in the pad development standards so it's just not a speculative development there are the details that are there that will be approved as part of the pad part of the general plan amendment as we move forward into the design review site plan i'm happy to answer any questions that you you might have but we appreciate your review of this and and appreciate the the recommendation of approval by planning commission and also staff yeah yeah well um i've been to that site i and i i was i was the council i actually brought forward the scenic corridor that was something that i i brought um in the scenic quarter apparently there's some confusion that applies to off off-site signs not to development it has nothing to do with development and this site is is below grade i don't know how far i don't know if you know how far below grade but for it's not really going to appear like four stories because it's it's and then the freeway is very high there too right so do you know you know i mean but the difference in elevation like say for example 83rd avenue or or how far below that grade not bob do you know the exact what's that yeah so council member tunnel challenge mayor um it's about 15 to 20 feet down and so it's it's almost two stories that you're talking about that you're you're down there and additionally what will be up on that berm as well it's just not going to be a bare berm um there's vegetation that's that's part of the site plan that's where we're providing a trail a connective trail all the way from 83rd down to bell road and so along with that you have the vegetation which also serves as an additional buffer for any building that is there so two stories down and then any of the two stories that's popping up you'll have about a story of that covered with nice lush vegetation which will be across the site so it's not what i think is is what the neighbors perceive as this big luminous and illuminating building up there um overlooking their site that's not what's what's what's occurring here on the site thank you shane i've been all over that neighborhood i went and i think ian and i went together to go look at the billboard or the thing hanging from the crane when we were debating the billboards i haven't heard from a single resident in my district that opposes this um this is a challenging parcel to develop um and i think it's a i think it's a i think it's a great use of this land i'm in support of it i appreciate that and council member thomas off i believe that that's why you're not seeing the opposition here you saw the opposition in 2000 whenever that was 15 because it was a billboard um this even mr watt acknowledged that this is a beautiful project and and what we are bringing is is a quality development and i think that that's why you do not see the neighbors here tonight because it is a a great great project i think the density in the in the area of arrowhead mall is an important thing also um you know we know the challenges of retail um uh you know i i just i'm in support of the project i think it's a good project and it's literally not going to look like four stories because of of the way the parcel sits there right mr milner uh thank you councilmember uh tom schaff went over mostly items that i was going to discuss and i i am also in support of this i haven't had uh my district borders this this project is actually in council member thomas district but it borders my district and i haven't had any any residents that have uh voiced any opposition to it and i i believe having the uh the skyline that you're describing uh it's going to be a nice looking uh project thank you thank you anyone else okay there's no one else public hearing is now closed can i get a motion on item 27 resolution 020-101 yes mayor i move we adopt resolution r20101 second okay motion councilmember tom shop second councilmember hugh to approve the recommended action is there any discussion on the motion hearing none roll call vote councilmember will dominate you vote i announced member claire how do you vote aye announcement member hugh how do you vote hi councilmember tommy trump how do you vote aye councilmember turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote aye sure we'll try that motion carries unanimous i'm gonna get a motion on item 27 ordinance number zero two zero dash five seven yes mayor i mean we adopt ordinance oh two zero dash five seven second motion council member shaw the second council member hugh to approve the recommended action any discussion on this particular motion hearing none roll call vote again mr aldama how do you vote hi house member clark how do you vote hi councilmember hugh how do you vote all right councilmember thomas how do you vote aye house member turner how do you vote all right vice mayor how do you vote hi chair of outside the motion carries also unanimous mrs bauer would you introduce item 28 origins 020-58 m28 ordinance number o 20-58 an ordinance of the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona rezoning property located at the southeast corner of 115th avenue and glendale avenue from p.a.d planned area development to pad sud planned area development with a special use district overlay for a project known as phoenix cement glendale and extending sand and gravel operations until 2038 amending the zoning map providing for an effective date and directing the city clerk to record a certified copy of the ordinance thank you mayor council once again this is a request for zoning change specifically 0120-05 by phoenix cement this two-part request the first part of the request has to do with the rezoning of 55 acres from planned area development to planned area development with a special use district overlay current use is for an inert materials landfill and a sand and gravel mining operation with with an experi excuse me an expiration date of 2038. second part of the request has to do with amendment of an existing special use district overlay in the plant area development pid and light industrial m1 zoning districts to extend the time limit for mining operations in existing five years to the year 2038. the applicant is gammage and burnham for phoenix cement this is the subject property it's located along the east side of 115th avenue just south of glendale avenue it's located within an area designated by the city's general plan is appropriate for business park uses again this is just alongside of the glendale municipal airport this is the zoning map depicting the subject property in yellow it overlaps two different pid districts as well as the existing sud district and includes the m1 zoned property to the south where the existing operation currently commences it's located alongside of m1 district as other pid districts maricopa county is located to the west of the site a1 property is located to the north again the site subject property depicted with cross hatching at the southeast corner of glendale and 105th 115th avenue [Music] if the photo was a little bit bigger you could see the excavation occurring on the southern portion of the site as part of the existing operation the current zoning request includes also the northern portion of the site alongside of glendale avenue just going back for briefly regarding the background of the site august 25th 2009 the city council began with the rezoning of the property they re-zoned the northern 61 acres to planned area development which permits 61 acres to be used for a business park which has not yet been developed and light industrial uses as part of a 217 acre master plan development they also rezoned the southern portion of the property 99 acres to m1 light industrial on december 10th of 2013 the city council approved 01 1305 which was a special use district overlay on the south part of the property basically to accommodate the sand and gravel operation on november 22nd of 2016 the city council approved 01 1605 a special use district on the middle portion of the property and the special use district permits the mining and extraction of sand and gravel until 2033. so uh with regard to the request at hand what we're doing this evening is requesting um that we add an sud to the 55 acres to the north in yellow with an expiration of 2038 as well as extending the existing sud for the area to the south from 2033 to 2038 so the site would host the santa gravel operation from the north to the south and the expiration would be 2038. with regard to the notification involvement process behind the request notice was mailed to adjacent property as owners within one thousand feet on february the 18th site has been posted since january the 23rd the crest request also advertised june 25th in the glendale star hearing notices were mailed june 26th we have not received any comments that i'm aware of regarding this request section 6.505 of the city of glendale zoning ordinance requires the special use district shall not be granted unless the use is compatible with existing and planned land uses and shall not be detrimental to the following one increased automobile traffic or impact on the circulation system of the adjacent neighborhoods but there not be excessive noise or light generated from the site excessive scale or height in relation to super surrounding properties hours of operation adequate parcel size to provide appropriate buffers or mitigation measures to surrounding properties six disruption of the development characteris adjacent properties that finds the request conforms to these standards and recommends approval subject to the following stipulations i believe there are 13 of them bear with me item number one dedication of additional right of way on glendale avenue to provide a half width of 65 feet from the center line of the roadway also 75 feet from the monument line shall be made before any permits are issued for any development on the property two all half street improvements on glendale avenue adjacent to the site shall be completed prior to issuing any building permits for development on the property required improvement standards are determined by the current version of the city of glendale engineering design standards three development should be in substantial conformance with the development booklet dated april 17th 2020 for all lighting on the site is required to be placed downward and fully shielded five the application shall notify the city of glendale water services department of any changes to the mining reclamation plan should there be any modifications prior to or during mining operations six applicant responsible for complying with all requirements of glendale city code chapter 18 section 12 landfills prior to beginning operation of the inert landfill seven all requirements of ordinance number 2868 not modified by this request shall remain in effect eight all requirements for ordinance number three zero one nine not modified by this request shall remain in effect nine developer provide documentation city prior to final approval construction documents and or issuance of permits that form 7460-1 be filed for the development and that a development receive a no-hazard determination from the faa ten letters of determination issued 2019 november 27 aeronautical study numbers 2019-awp-13499-13505 11 developer and operator must comply with any terms required and the no hazard determination such as installing and maintaining any required lighting 12 if temporary equipment used during construction exceeds the height of the permanent structure a separate form 7460-1 shall be submitted to the faa in a no-hazard determination obtained prior to the construction start date and 13 the builder or its contractors must contact the airport prior to construction if they're using cranes so that we may issue a notice to pilots this is prior to when cranes will be on site mr mayor that concludes my presentation and i'll be happy to respond to your questions thank you questions from the council yes i have two mayor uh for clarification mr gerhart um the dedication of the right-of-way and improvements to glendale avenue if i understood what you said would not occur until the site was developed commercially or industrial prior to development of the site as a business park okay so that could be that would be well after 30 38 correct most likely yes okay that's one question second question is what is an inert landfill what can you put in an inert landfill um it's these are non-hazardous substances non-toxic substances well i know biodegradable substances could you put it in an old car or a sink i mean what can you is it is it material that is compactable to make the site developable or is it just stuff that could be anything uh good question and i i honestly don't know the answer thank you draw me to answer it or maybe i'd love to typically when you're dealing with something that's inert there's no chemical reaction there's nothing there's nothing by a bio degradable type element or rusting so you look at things such as concrete stone that's an inert material the reason i ask that is because at one point i remember a sand and gravel operation maybe was phoenix cement saying that the soil in that area is no good right now for development so one of the benefits of the sand and gravel operation was that they would be filling the areas that had been removed with of sand and gravel with with good compactable soil that would make it ripe or ready for development so if you can throw concrete blocks in there or whatever i know that for example a new o'neill ranch was built on a landfill that was filled with inert that's between 67-59 bethany to camelback and some of the the land subsided and some of the houses started to crack develop big cracks because of the inert stuff in the landfill so i guess my question is why are we allowing them to put inert stuff in there not good old-fashioned dirt that will compact properly and make it ready for development just a question maybe i'll take a stab at that i actually that just come down to if it would have been compacted properly and tested uh inert is could be rocks if it's not compacted properly then you can have that problem with settling okay i i just don't want it to be a future problem for whatever is developed on top of that land that they're going to have to worry about subsidence and cracks down the road i understand any other questions but yes mayor that was one of the questions i have is what will we be left with a developable piece of property at the in 2038 when the sand and gravel is mining operation has concluded well there's no i don't think there's is there anything in here that the property has to be i don't know how much you know is it going to be lower down five feet three feet i mean what's what are we going to be left with in 2038 is the applicant here would you like to speak on this there i also have a presentation did you want me to address the just the question at the moment well let's do the questions and see what goes from there okay uh mayor i asked frank turk with phoenix cement to join me and just for your record my name is stephen anderson with gammon burnham my address is 40 north central 20th floor uh frank need to introduce yourself good evening my name is frank turk with phoenix cement uh director of land and reclamation for the company so inert landfills are basically any material that like was mentioned does not leach it's inert rock soil concrete brick no hood no none of the products that you were talking about we don't take any construction debris or anything like that so what we do after mining the site to depth we compact in lifts to bring it up at a compaction rate defined by our reclamation plan so it basically allows us to ensure proper compaction through lifts all the way up to surrounding grade or current grade when you say compaction sheet foot basically uh either that or or we can do yeah we have sheep foot out on the site there are other different methods honestly stockpile and surcharging there's different methods that we use that help really surcharge the area and do you test that as you do that is there a certain compression uh at 90 off top of my head i want to say 96 to 98 percent compaction i'm not 100 off time ahead i can look it up and typically is that suitable to build on yes absolutely there are depending on what uh structures and designs are required you know footings are based on you know what elevation and uh height weight load for the actual building itself or parking so depending on what is put on there different you know footings and compactions still sometimes required but it's definitely a buildable surface i i have a question for thank you mayor so i'm not exactly i'm guessing i'm not exactly sure how you but i imagine you mine an area and then you and then you then you do the compacting and and then you move on to another area in mind that area is that how it works okay so what happens when you get to the very last area i don't i didn't see anywhere in here where are you are we going to require you to finish that that last area when you're finished mining it because there's at some point you're going to mine all the gravel and sand out of there and then go somewhere else right yeah correct and then consistent with our reclamation plan yeah we will fill the entire uh site up to grade does the does america does the agreement require that or is that just a i know our one shake obligation or sorry you can step back yeah i don't see mayor members of council the relative provisions in the narrative are pages 11 and 12 of the narrative and essentially the indicates that the state has approved and will monitor and force a reclamation plan that describes the inert material like mr bailey indicated it then indicates that phoenix cements trained personnel will review survey and test results and will require versions visual inspection of the material prior to accepting it for backfill phoenix cement is required to maintain the records appropriate protocols will occur to ensure the backfill and final reclamation for each mined area is safe for future commercial and industrial development below are some of the protocols which will assure no subsidence in the reclaimed area backfill material will occur in moisture condition and compact lifts or layers the larger size particles between 12 to 24 inches in height will not occur in consecutive layers sand sized soil will be placed over the layers with larger particles to fill any potential voids layers will have a relative minimum compaction of 95 percent so i think that the narrative clearly commits us to uh leave the entire site in a buildable condition when we are done okay mayor and where and where is that at pages 11 and 12 of the narrative which we are stipulated to comply with that's our own narrative for the sud all right thank you you're welcome i i have one further question common as long as i have the applicant here you are offering a 90-foot buffer on the south side of glendale avenue and while i i think that's wonderful i don't believe it's enough we're working on glendale we will be working on glendale avenue in the next couple of months and reconstructing it i would prefer well i wouldn't well i would like to see but that doesn't mean it'll happen i would like to see a greater buffer um on your property as it abuts glendale avenue perhaps as much as 300 feet how would you [Music] react to such a suggestion mayor members council i would prefer to give my presentation and address the uh councilwoman's question as part of that presentation because i believe it requires some context mayor while the powerpoint is being loaded the executive summary of the case before you this evening is pretty straightforward and can be summarized by these four factors number one there are no citizen comments on this proposal whatsoever number two the staff is recommending approval with stipulations that have been agreed to by the applicant there are 13 of them as you know number three you have a unanimous recommendation from the planning commission for approval and number four you actually do get your needed right-of-way for the glendale expansion project the councilwoman just described as well as a much-needed off-site retention basin for your city landfill that is part of the discussions that we have had with the city with regard to the proposal again it seeks to expand an existing 160 acre sand and gravel business by 55 acres to 215 total acres on a parcel of land that's located across from your city landfill i'll talk about that in greater detail in a moment again the existing business has been operating on the site for several years now without incident and without complaint from any of our neighbors most of whom are you the proposed expansion doesn't change the nature of the current operations only the size and we are here seeking your recommendation for approval phoenix cement operates on this site with a special use district and uh so that's the sud so um next slide please thank you so staff went through this a little bit during their presentation the city approved the original sud for 100 acres of property in december of 2013 and phoenix cement started operation the following month so we've been operating on the site now for more than six years can i have the next slide please in late 2016 about three years after we started operations in the original council approval the city approved a northward expansion uh from 100 acres to 160 acres so this is the second expansion we are seeking at the time in 2016 the city was able to confirm the phoenix cement had been operating the site responsibly and in a manner consistent with its unique promises and that there was no record of public issues with the business from any of our neighbors notice no citizens whatsoever expressed comments or concerns during that hearing process what are those unique promises that phoenix cement made for this site first we promised to put all of our processing at the bottom of our excavation 50 feet below grade where it is invisible from the public second we promise to erect a 10-foot earthen berm around the perimeter of our active operation which means that we're actually 60 feet from below the line of sight third we promised to maintain all of our faa approvals for our operation and proximity to our neighbor to the east the glendale airport we've in fact already updated those for part of this expansion fourth we promised to comply with maricopa county dust control regulations which we obviously have to do but such that our dust would not impact airport operations a promise we have kept fifth we promise to operate with a single point of access we are right next to glen harbour boulevard we have proximity to it but we do not use it we use only the intersection on 115th avenue in glendale which we share with the city landfill that way the heavy truck traffic has a signalized intersection that we can share safely finally we promise to reclaim the areas on the site that's what we talked about a moment ago as soon as we finish mining a particular area in fact we have done so in conformance with our reclamation plan and we are just about done with our first reclamation area on the site so those are the promises that we made and we kept so next slide please who are our neighbors well our main neighbors as i indicated before you the main neighbor is the landfill to the north if you're standing on our property it's the thing you're going to see it is of course 390 acres in size it has a permitted height of 130 feet in the air and it has a setback of 150 feet from glendale avenue to its vertical face now inside that 150 foot setback you do activities you actually use that frontage along glendale avenue for truck traffic and things like that you've got some equipment out there as well to the to our east is the city airport i've already talked about how we've been tried to be a good neighbor and think we have been a good neighbor to the airport uh i would note that we are separated by the airport by a large power line easement i know that you've been out to the airport you know there's a giant power line to the west the airport we actually own the land that the power lines run across and we may need to talk about that in a moment to our west we've got our i'm sorry to the south we've got your water treatment facility and to our west we have another santa gravel operation cal portland that cal portland mine is in maricopa county now cal portland is a responsible operator as well but as you know and since they are in the county they are not subject to municipal regulation so they have no promises to make or to keep we are different we are subject to your jurisdiction okay next slide please we have no residential neighbors that's why i think nobody is here tonight the closest residences are all at least a half a mile away separated from us by distance by riverbeds and other industrial operations such as your landfill so next slide please so this is the current proposal four years since we were last before you were seeking a second expansion by 55 acres out to glendale avenue in making this request again want to confirm that we've kept all of the promises and those promises will remain in place we're proposing no changes in those operational conditions to an outside observer there should be no change to what's going on in this property except that that 10-foot berm will move closer to glendale avenue go to the next slide please so this is the 90-foot setback uh that we that council member clark just mentioned for us this proposal is a little bit different from our prior two proposals because we are moving closer to a real public street if you will one that actually has traffic on it which we haven't done personally or previously and that's why we are proposing the 90-foot setback now again um that's less than the 150-foot setback that the landfill has as you can see just to the north but as you can also see in the photograph the landfill's got a lot of activity inside that 150 feet so the landfill has got a vertical face 150 feet way back from the street whereas we go down and then the landfill uses its setback which we are committed not to do this setback however is a little bit more than just a setback there are some things that are occurring here that councilwoman has just touched on which is the forthcoming expansion of glendale avenue uh that requires an additional 10 feet of dedicated right-of-way from us now uh so there was a question i believe about whether we had to dedicate clinton improve glendale avenue now or 30 years or 20 years from now staff is correct that most of the improvements have to occur 20 years from now but the 10 feet is what the city needs now and we have committed to provide that 10 feet of extra right of way now second we have committed to landscaping the area it's in in our narrative that we will put a xeriscaped landscape of some kind out in that setback again no active uses within our 90 feet and third and this is i think is most important is that because of the expansion of glendale avenue both to the north and south the landfill is going to lose some of their drainage and retention for their site of course they've got a vertical face so they've got pretty significant retention basin issues and unfortunately by expanding glendale avenue they no longer have the ability to drain their site on their own property so the city has approached us and said can we run a pipe underneath glendale avenue and then put a drainage basin for the landfill within your 90-foot setback and we have said yes we're willing to cooperate with the city and support our neighbors to the north we think it's appropriate for us to cooperate with you in that effort the engineering of that hasn't taken place by the city yet so we don't know exactly where that will be or or exactly how big it will be but we know that it's coming and we've made that verbal commitment i did want to pivot again to the community input on this case which is that there have been none we've done all of the notice we've had no comments whatsoever we attribute that to our performance uh as a good neighbor and as a good responsible business operator including our city neighbors at the landfill the airport and the water treatment facility and again the staff report is recommending approval of the request as filed subject to the stipulations and the planning commission is recommending unanimous approval now as for councilman clark's request about the setback and i'm sorry i keep calling you councilwoman clark are you are you the vice mayor still or okay that gentleman is okay good thank you uh so the councilwoman has uh suggested a 300-foot setback might be more appropriate i i find myself in the same same position that your former planning director did uh about an hour and a half ago which is i'm being asked to negotiate from the podium uh we had uh obviously uh met with uh councilwoman when we started this process and this was not an issue that we talked about at that time it's a big hit it's nine percent of the site that's proposed for the expansion this is not an inconsequential expansion of the setback request that we have proposed for you we think the proposal we've made before you is a reasonable one it has good support um and we and we think that that we have performed in a way that uh warrants your consideration for approval as presented again that includes the retention basin and 10 feet of dedicated right-of-way that was part of the support of the glendale widening project with that mayor i would be happy to answer your questions from the council all right questions yes mayor mr anderson i appreciate your presentation and your remarks and uh to tell you the truth i was not aware that it was it was a 90-foot setback until i read the material that we had in our packets um knowing that there's a 150-foot setback on the glendale side i would at least like to replicate or mirror such a setback because i believe that glendale avenue is our street throughout the entire city and whenever we have an opportunity to preserve it protect it or beautify it that we should make every opportunity to do so um and no it was not my intent to negotiate from the podium i mean as i said i spent this weekend reading the material and and that's when it came to my attention so i i i while i appreciate the 10 foot dedication that 10 foot dedication is part of the 90 feet that you're giving up is that not correct uh mayor members council uh yes the 10 feet uh is why this is a 90-foot setback as opposed to a 100-foot setback i will uh tell you i've had the opportunity to discuss uh the councilwoman's suggestion um and uh and uh her logic is appealing uh the landfill is set back 150 feet uh and uh it would seem reasonable that we respect that similar 150-foot setback so that would be an acceptable compromise i would be very appreciative of that so that at least both sides of the street are mirroring one another so thank you for that that gesture that generous gesture i do appreciate it okay so i guess my question for you is uh we don't need to have that in our ordinance that's a that can be just acknowledged here and you'll write it into your your contract with city is that correct uh mayor members council that's a good question um because we do have this forthcoming drainage easement and dedication that's that's going to happen for the glendale expansion but i think that mr bailey and i would agree that uh this probably should be a specific added stipulation uh that uh there'd be a 150-foot uh setback and that would be acceptable to us as an additional stipulation we'll go ahead and have council member clerk do that when when we make the motion thank you you'll do it okay okay so if there's no other questions uh public hearing is now open uh for the public on ordinance 020-58 i have no speaker cards on this issue anyone wishing to speak hearing none public hearing is now closed okay can i get a motion on ordinance 020-58 mayor good i move we adopt ordinance uh number zero no oh two zero dash five eight uh with the additional stipulation of a 150 foot setback provided by the applicant as discussed in this meeting second i have a motion from councilman return or second council member clark to approve the recommended action is there any discussion on this motion hearing none councilmember odama how do you vote councilmember clark how do you vote aye just for the record council member obama voted i council member hugh hi councilmember tom schoff aye announcement member turner aye vice mayor aye say the motion carries with stipulation now moving on to ordinances ms bauer would you introduce item number 29 number 29 ordinance 020-59 ordinance number o 20-59 an ordinance of the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing cash and appropriation balance transfers between budget items in the adopted fiscal year 2019 2020 and 2020 2021 budgets mayor members of the council here to provide staff report is our budget and finance director lisette camacho good evening mayor members of the council this ordinance is to approve fiscal year 2020 and fiscal year 2021 appropriation or budget transfers these transfers are consistent with the city's cash and budget appropriation transfer policy and the city's total budget appropriation across all funds for both years remains unchanged with this action exhibit a contains the budget transfers for fiscal year 2020 lines one two three through three transfers appropriation into fiscal year 2020 covet 19 expenditure tracking divisions line 4 contains transfers of appropriation from workers compensation contingency to workers compensation operating budget for claims exhibit b contains the budget transfers for fiscal year 2021 lines one through five is a transfer of pro of appropriation for the covet 19 expenditure tracking divisions and with that i'd be happy to answer any questions you may have questions from the council saying none i have no speaker cards on this issue can i get a motion on ordnance 020-59 item number 29. mayor yeah motion to approve item number 29 ordinance number 020-59 second a motion from council member old domestic council member hughes approved the recommended action any discussion on a motion hearing none roll call vote council member old dom how do you vote aye announced member clark how do you vote aye house member hugh how do you vote hi announcement returner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote hi councilmember thomas shop is not available at the moment the chair votes say uh it does pass the motion does pass mr would you introduce item 30 ordinance 020-60 ordinance number oh 20-60 an ordinance of the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona authorizing the execution of warranty deeds easements and maps of dedication at various locations throughout the city and directing the city clerk to record a certified copy of the ordinance mayor members of the council here provide staff report this evening is jamie chapin principal engineer thank you mr phelps good evening mayor and council members this is a request for city council to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an ordinance accepting various real property interests throughout the city these real property interests consist of rights of way for roadway and associated improvements and easements for water lines sewer lines sidewalks and public utilities these interests are being granted by private property owners in conjunction with development projects and by accepting these interests the city will be able to operate and maintain our facilities this concludes my presentation i'd be happy to answer any questions you have um on any of the specific items or process in general questions from the council saying none i have no speaker cards on this item can i get a motion yes my move would approve and adopt ordinance number 20-60 second okay i have a motion from councilmember hugh for ordinance 020-60 item number 30 a second councilmember clerk to prove the recommended action is there any discussion on a motion hearing none roll call vote council member el dama how do you vote aye announcement clerk how do you vote aye councilmember hugh how do you vote aye council member thomachoff is not back yet councilmember turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote aye chair vote scythe that motion does carry moving on to item number 31 ordinance 0-2-0-6-1 ordinance number o 20-61 an ordinance of the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona amending the glendale city code chapter 10 title regarding cable television mayor members of the council here to provide staff report is don bessler chief capital improvement officer thank you mr phelps mayor don bessler from engineering the ordinance before you tonight that our clerk read is intended to amend the current chapter of the city code chapter 10 by inserting the words telecom and fiber into the title and the title that as it exists today refers to cable television the step if approved would bring our code into alignment with the arizona revised statutes that were amended over the last several years to make sure the intent of it in the background of it is is to get cities to work together to have similar jurisdictional language so that the telecom and cable providers had similar conditions as they worked through the valley i can answer any other questions that you have that concludes my presentation any questions you have a question go ahead yeah thanks does this uh change in any way restrict our ability to regulate our authority over these uh entities mayor council member turner it doesn't restrict our ability to continue to regulate the use of the right-of-way but it does we've always had the responsibility to be reasonable fair and consistent so no it doesn't restrict us from being able to do that as you know every time we do a license agreement or something similar we come back to the city council and have you vote on those items individually so we don't think it does this is also an item that was supported by the arizona league of cities and towns and i know there was a lot of work on that and members of this council may have served on those committees thank you yeah i have no speaker cards on anyone needing to speak on this there's no other questions can i get a motion for ordinance 020-61 or item number 31 yes mayor i move we pass and adopt ordinance 0-2-0-6-1 second i have motion council member clark set with councilmember hugh to approve the recommended action any discussion on the motion hearing none council member l dama how do you vote hi councilmember clark how do you vote aye announcement hugh how do you vote hi announcement trump how do you vote councilmember turner how do you vote hi uh for the record council member tom and shot voted i uh vice mayor how do you vote aye chair of outside the motion carrier is unanimous moving on to resolutions ms bower would you introduce resolution r20-102 resolution number resolution of the council the city of glendale maricopa county arizona adopting policy guidelines and application procedures for the formation of revitalization districts mayor members of the council here to provide staff report on both item 32 and item 33 as glendale assistant city manager vicki rios thank you mr phelps mayor members of the council this is a request for city council to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution that establishes policy guidelines and application procedures for the formation of revitalization districts this uh was discussed this item with the council and presented as a draft this afternoon at the workshop and we answered a lot of questions at that time but if there are any other questions i'd be happy to answer them any questions from the council i have no speaker cards on this item either uh can i get a motion for resolution or 20-102 item 32 mayor thank you um i move we pass on adopt resolution number r20-102 with two changes to what was presented earlier first change is that in article 1 section 1.7 that the language be replaced with an rde shall not levy a property tax except a specifically authorized pursuant to ars 48-6817 an rd shall not levy an excise tax and the other change would be that in article 3 section 3.3 the proposed language be changed to read one paper copy and one electronic copy of the application will be submitted to the city manager the city attorney and the chief financial officer of the city second okay so meekly we're going to go ahead and take this uh motion for r20-102 as uh proposed amended as one vote everybody understand it all good okay so you've heard that we have a motion uh we have a second from council member thomas off is that correct okay motion made from councilmember turner any other discussion on a motion hearing none roll call vote council member o'donnell how do you vote aye councilmember clark how do you vote hi councilmember hugh how do you vote all right councilmember thomas how do you vote hi councilmember turner how do you vote explain my vote go ahead um as was mentioned in the presentation and for those who may have been watching earlier today this was presented to council as for background information earlier this afternoon and i just want to express that and this goes for the next one that we'll consider too the the improvement districts i would just appreciate it in the future if we had more time between the 30 000 foot overview and the time it comes before us for action there's really been no opportunity for us to digest these changes or to get input from residents or anyone else that we know that we could look to for this fortunately the action we take tonight will be amendable and we can change it in the future but just uh for reference sake for management i would like to have more time between the presentation and workshop and our actual action and with that i vote aye vice mayor how do you vote aye chair of outside the motion does carry ms bower item 33 resolution r20-103 please resolution number r20-103 a resolution the council of the city of glendale maricopa county arizona adopting policy guidelines and application procedures for the formation of municipal improvement districts mayor excuse me mayor members of the council this is a request for city council to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution that establishes poly policy guidelines and application procedures for the formation of improvement districts this item was also discussed uh this afternoon at the workshop and there were questions and answers at that time but if there are any other questions i can answer your questions about this item now okay any questions no questions okay i have no speaker cards on this either so i know there's going to be an amendment from the floor miss tomachoff yes there will be thank you mayor i move we adopt resolution r20-103 and amend article 3 section 3.3 to read and one paper copy one paper copy and one electronic copy of the application will be submitted to the city manager the city attorney and the chief financial officer of the city second i'm trying to figure out if you made that motion correctly or not michael i thought she did i was just trying to remember how you did it let me do it again yeah go ahead and do it one more time just make sure uh i move that we adopt resolution r20-103 and amend section article 3 section 3.3 to read one paper copy and one electronic copy of the application will be submitted to the city manager the city attorney and the chief financial officer of the city okay second okay we have a motion from councilmember thomas sent council member milner to approve the recommended action any discussion on the motion okay we're voting on this action with that uh proposed amendment as all one action council member obama how do you vote aye council member clark how do you vote hi councilmember hugh how do you vote all right council member tom chomp how do you vote hi councilmember turner how do you vote hi vice mayor how do you vote hi jeremy outside the motion carries request for future workshop and executive session uh do i have a motion for a future workshop and i'm sorry a future meeting in a future workshop and a future executive session vice mayor i move that we hold a special city council voting meeting on monday august 17 2020 at 10 am in the civic center 5750 west glen drive i further move that we hold the next regularly scheduled city council workshop on tuesday august 25th 2020 at 12 30 p.m in the civic center 5750 west glen drive to be followed by an executive session pursuant to ars 38-431.0 second okay i have a motion from the vice mayor a second from council member clark um all in favor of vote aye aye aye aye opposed do you have what that motion does carry moving on to council comments and suggestions councilmember o'donnell none at this time mayor thank you councilmember clerk yes mayor i've been dying to announce this all evening because it really is a big deal so i'm going to read some remarks to you i'm excited to share that verizon innovative learning schools a non-profit arm of verizon wireless will equip every student and every teacher a desert spirit elementary school and sunset vista elementary school with a tablet and with up to four years of data providing access for learning in the classroom or at home by providing tablets and access verizon innovative learning schools helps under-resourced students develop the tools and confidence they need to thrive in today's digital learning environment we are very grateful and we really are very grateful that this organization selected these two glendale schools and we look forward to highlighting the schools and verizon over the next few weeks so you will hear more about this very generous act because that's a lot of tablets and four years of internet access for those tablets is indeed represents a significant amount of donation thank you mayor thank you councilmember hugh ether mayor councilmember thomas i would like to congratulate uh council member hugh councilmember mullner councilmember clark and mayor wires on the re-election congratulations to the four of you look forward to serving with you thank you thank you thank you councilmember turner thank you mayor um it's sad for me to have to share with uh with those uh in my district and citywide that we had another fatal fire in the barrel district um within the last week and despite the best efforts of our our fire department a life was lost and i just would like to again strongly ask and suggest that all of you watching make sure you have working smoke detectors in your homes test them regularly if you don't have a smoke detector and you need assistance getting smoke detectors please contact my office and uh we'll make sure we get you hooked up thank you mayor vice mayor and nothing nightmare thank you and uh i'll keep mine very brief i i want to thank the citizens of glendale for their faith in uh supporting myself and councilmember clark councilman hugh and councilmember milner i know i'll speak for myself but i think i'm also speaking for the rest we're all going to try as hard as we can to make you proud to do the best we can for the city so again to the citizens of glendale thank you for your support those of you that didn't support me i'm still going to do everything i can to try to make you proud so with that we'll go ahead and move on citizen's comments next on the agenda is just that council makes this opportunity available to citizens to bring information business before this council that's not included on the printed agenda council can only act on matters that are on the printed agenda but may refer the matter to the city manager for follow-up if you're unable to speak from the podium if you'll notify us we'll bring a microphone to you and you can uh move to the seat close to the podium if possible uh with that i have one speaker card and that's mr livingston mr livingston if you'll make your way here again you know the rules we're not going to let people be mean you can state your case say your things but if it just needs to be done properly podium's right here you can remove your mask so we can hear you better gary livingston i live on uh port-au-prince in ray milner's district this war district and uh i i personally wish i didn't have to come here but i did i do so because of uh a lot of my neighbors and our discussion between us about this council and about our our council representative and you mr mayor the election is over and for that i looked up the word trust and my dictionary stated for the word trust was one in which confidence is placed for that for this citizen trusting the mayor and the council member for my district is long gone considering what has transpired over the years i request the following questions answered by the mayor and my council representative 2020 meeting uh i heard and saw on a lot of the posters the independent watchdog was was uh eliminated and uh i'm hoping that we have another watchdog over what the council does and i would assume it is an auditor so i don't know who it was that was left go and i don't i'd certainly like to know why that auditor watchdog was let go mr malnour before the election stated that we citizens voted down the pay raise that you mr mayor and ray wanted but uh now he doesn't want to work the business of the district as hard as he used to i think that's pretty bad and if it's not as good as you like it maybe you should just leave mr milner you certainly in our opinion haven't done what the district wanted you mr mayor the the trips to europe and other places seem to be great but for this citizen i saw no return on our best investment so i might add that the arena was supposed to be off limit and that suite was supposed to be eliminated and that was when your previous council member gary sherwood was recalled because of that arena suite so i would certainly like to see that eliminated like the citizens wanted them i've talked to may ray mounter numerous times about the immortal immoral food tax that we have in this city considering that all the people that are out of work need need food and this and that i don't understand why this city still has it it was supposed to be eliminated long time ago and they have here to wrap it up sir pardon me go ahead and wrap it up your time is up okay i on my computer i have a lot of people complaining about their water bill rates and i like to i've been filling them in and that is [Music] uh years a few years ago this city took 15 million dollars out of the water department fund for the arena and now i heard that you now have 50 million dollars in the bank so why aren't you paying that back to the water department so we don't have so we have a less less dollar amount for uh the water that we use uh your time i think i think councilman clark knows that and i was on the water commissioners and that was that that should be done and and it hasn't been so i would certainly like to see that done thank you okay with that if there's no further business before the council we're adjourned [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] my [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] so [Music] [Music] so [Music] [Music] so [Music] you [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] you