CP Final Report_without labels

City of Glendale — Regular Meeting (2024-10-22)

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 14634 characters

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FINAL
REPORT
for Crow Holdings, Luke Logistics
Application Nos.: AN261 & ZON24-03

COMPLETION OF THE FOLLOWING IS NECESSARY FOR FINAL REPORT APPROVAL.

The Citizen Participation Final Report was prepared in accordance with the City of Glendale
Citizen Participation Ordinance (CPO). As prepared, the Final Report meets the City’s CPO
requirements and the recommended notification area as identified by the Planning Department.
In accordance with requirements of the CPO.

SUMMARY / FINAL REPORT
Total Individuals notified: 74
Total Participants:
2 residents
CONCERNS, ISSUES, PROBLEMS EXPRESSED

There was a total of ten people in attendance at the neighborhood meeting, of which only two
were neighbors. Christina Lavelle, Senior Planner, Taylor Earl, Attorney representing the
property owners, Michael Buschbacher II, from the development team, Steve Shaul
representing the property owner and developer, Martin Hazine representing the civil engineer,
Tim Thielke, the project architect, Scott Schofield from the water provider and two contractors
for a nearby project also attended the meeting. See attached Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In
sheet.

The meeting format was an informal open house style meeting. Mr. Taylor Earl, the attorney
representing the property owners, opened the neighborhood meeting with an introduction of
the project then followed with individual conversations with the two neighbors in attendance.
Informal discussion occurred amongst the group, more like a conversation, allowing attendees
the opportunity to ask questions and learn more about the proposal.

Mr. Earl met or spoke with all of the attendees at the meeting. Mr. Earl discussed the project
with Ms. Curtis describing the project as adding land to the existing approved light industrial
development, through a PAD Amendment process.

Presentation boards were available for those in attendance to review the site plan, renderings
and exhibits in more detail. Mr. Brodkorb noted that he was in support of the project and
wanted to make sure his address was not confused with the properties being annexed into the
City of Glendale.

Below is a summary of the questions received and responses provided during and following
the presentation. Responses were provided by Mr. Earl and Mr. Buschbacher.

ZON24-03
13 AUG 2024
APPROVED
City of Glendale
Planning Division

Questions
Responses
Mr. Brodkorb noted that his address is the
same for the parcel to his north and wanted to
make sure that his property in not included by
mistake
in
the
annexation
and
PAD
Amendment. Mr. Brodkorb mentioned that he
is in support of the project.
Mr. Buschbacher took note of Mr. Brodkorb’s
comment and advised we would let staff know at
the city, so that there is no confusion. Upon further
research it appears that both properties do have
the same address as listed with the county
assessor. This was noted and discussed the Ms.
Lavelle. A follow-up email was also sent to both
Ms. Lavelle and Ms. Eastman with addressing for
the city, in both an email and phone call to Ms.
Eastman.
Ms. Curtis advised us of her concern about
construction occurring outside of allowed
hours on another property that is not part of
this project.
Mr. Buschbacher noted that construction has not
started on the approved buildings within the Luke
Logistics development. And that it is unfortunate
that other developers have not honored the
construction hours timeframe for doing work. Mr
Earl sympathized with Ms. Curtis also.
Ms. Curtis then said that she doesn’t like
industrial development coming into her
neighborhood
Mr. Earl noted that the original PAD was approved
prior to this current request and that this was only
a request to add roughly 8 acres to the already
approved 146 net acres to provide space for semi-
truck and trailer parking.
Ms. Curtis said that her property value has
gone down in value and said her property was
valued at $400K.
This was noted. A quick research on Zillow shows
the property Zestimate to currently be $393K for
her property with a Zestimate value range of $319K
to $468K as of May 30th, 2024.
Ms. Curtis said she has frustrations with all of
the industrial development.
Mr. Earl said that he understands her frustration
and that again this would only to be to add a small
amount of land to an already approved project.
Ms Curtis said that each building was
supposed to be limited to only 60 people per
Luke Airforce Bases rules for development.
Mr. Earl said that many of the industrial
developments have to be designed to park a large
amount of people but that the reality was that a lot
of the labor has been automated in these
warehouses and the number of actual workers in
these facilities is much lower. Mr. Buschbacher did
a review of the Arizona Military Regional
Compatibility Project document issued in March of
2023 and the Luke Axiliary Field #1 Joint Land Use
Study of 2004 and did not find the requirement
noted by Ms.Curtis. A review of ARS Title 28
Section 28-8481 also did not turn up a result that
matched Ms. Curtis’s claim.
Ms. Curtis said she was concerned about the
amount of water that will be used in industrial
developments is more than what is used on
the nearby farms.
Mr. Earl noted that agricultural uses require a
significantly larger amount of water than most
industrial uses that could occur on this site.
Ms. Curtis said that she was concerned about
the location of the signs for this meeting.
Saying that nobody will ever read them and
that they should be put in the ROW along her
Mr. Buschbacher showed photos and the location
of five large signs that were placed for the meeting
according to the City of Glendale’s requirements
for posting for a neighborhood meeting. A map of

property where there is a grouping of
mailboxes, located at Myrtle & Alsup.
locations approved by staff is included with this
report.
Ms. Curtis said the sign locations were
keeping others away from this meeting.
Mr. Buschbacher again noted that the process that
the city required was complied with for posting the
site and that these signs are not allowed within the
right of way in locations that are not a part of the
project. Mr. Earl also noted that 74 residents were
sent a notice by first class mail with instructions on
how to attend the neighborhood meeting.
We discussed the property on the SWC of
Glendale and Alsup and Ms. Curtis said that it
was previously owned by a friend of hers but
that they sold it and someone else bought it
and that she heard through the grapevine that
a new owner was planning a retail use for
contractor’s supply store on the property. She
also mentioned that there is no one currently
living on that property.
Mr. Buschbacher thanked Ms. Curtis for the
information about this adjacent property.

Ms. Curtis said that the other projects in the
area were not respectful of the residents and
that in one case a concrete truck broke down
on Glendale Avenue and sat there for four
months before it was towed away.
Mr. Buschbacher noted this irregularity and
advised that the city would be notified and that
while this occurred near our project that it could not
have come from our project since construction on
the Luke Logistics site and not has not started yet.
Ms. Lavelle was made aware of this during the
neighborhood meeting.
Ms. Curtis said that truck traffic could not make
the turn south on Alsup at Bethany Home
Road because it was too narrow for trucks.
Mr. Earl advised that if warranted by staff at the
county, the road would be required to be widened
and that the existing irrigation ditch could be tiled
over to allow for a wider roadway width. Mr.
Buschbacher asked Ms. Curtis if she had any other
questions or comments.
Ms. Curtis provided a written statement,
requesting signs be installed on Glendale Ave,
Alsup Road and Sarival Ave., that say
“Residential Area , No Through Trucks,
Horseback Riders. She noted that the signs
are necessary for the safety of our families,
now that we have many more cars on our
streets.
Mr. Buschbacher thanked Ms. Curtis for the note
and captured a photo of it for the record. Ms.
Lavelle was made aware of the request. It was
noted to Ms. Curtis that Alsup Road is within the
County’s jurisdiction and that would need to be
addressed with MCDOT. The other two sign
requests are within the City of Glendale. The
written statement is included below at the end of
this report.
Ms. Curtis said that she has been there since
1989 and that as long as development stayed
on the east side of Alsup that she had no
problems with our project.
Mr. Buschbacher and Mr. Earl noted this comment
and thanked Ms. Curtis for her candidness, valued
comments and input in the citizen participation
process.

HOW CONCERNS WILL BE ADDRESSED?
As detailed above, the property owner and applicant have addressed each of the concerns
raised about the proposal. In addition, Mr. Buschbacher and Mr. Earl sent Ms. Curtis an
email summarizing her concerns and how they were addressed and asked if there were any
other issues or concerns about the PAD Amendment.

CONCERNS APPLICANT IS UNWILLING TO ADDRESS
The property owners understand the neighborhood’s comments and wants to be good
neighbors. They also understand that there might be stipulations added and requirements
which must be adhered to.

As detailed above, the property owner and applicant have addressed each of the concerns
raised about the proposal.

HOW THE PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVISED TO ADDRESS CONCERNS
As detailed above, the property owner and applicant have addressed each of the concerns
raised about the proposal.

APPLICANT SIGNATURE AND DATE
June 26th, 2024

Between May 29th, 2024 and today’s date, June 26th, 2024, there have been no other concerns,
issues or problems expressed by any of the participating individuals.

On June 7th, staff from the City of Glendale sent a response for Mr. Brodkorb noting that his
address will not be included in the annexation and that the annexation is per the submitted legal
description, which specifically describes only the parcels owned by Crow Holdings, APN’s 501-
60-034 & 501-60-010F. This information was forwarded on the neighbor, who responded via
email thanking us for resolving it and advising us that he is ready for us to break ground. This
email is also attached to the end of this report.

Lastly, on June 11th, 2024 we received a phone call from Mr.Brodkorb’s daughter, Stephanie
Courtwright, who said that squatters had taken up residence recently in the abandoned structure
on the subject property. City staff was notified via email. A quick phone call with Mr. Shaul of
Crow Holdings was held to discuss the squatter issue. Mr. Shaul advised that they had begun
the process to remove the squatters and would follow up with a demolition of the abandoned
structure from the previous owner. Ms. Courtwright was contacted on June 26th, 2024 to advise
of the follow-up on this issue. Signs for the neighborhood meeting were removed on June 14th,
2024 and an affidavit and photos to that effect are attached to the end of this report.

On June 27th, we reached back out to Ms. Curtis to make sure that her concerns were addressed.
We thanked her and clarified issue she had raised and included in a written note that she
prepared while at the neighborhood meeting. That note and the follow up and responses are
included below in a copy of the email exchange. No other communications occurred and that
concludes our outreach efforts.

The site was posted for the scheduled hearings on July 24, 2024. That affidavit and set of photos
are also included at the bottom of this report.

Should any adjacent property owners and/or other interested individuals raise any concern
between now and the hearings, the Project Team will make every effort to address those
concerns in the appropriate manner, such as but not limited to, personal visits, phone calls, or
other acceptable means. Members of the Project Team are committed to working with the City
of Glendale, surrounding neighbors, and any interested parties to ensure the compatibility and
success of this application.

This concludes the Citizen Participation Final Report for the proposed Luke Logistics PAD
Amendment for the property located southwest corner of Glendale Avenue and Alsup Road.

REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS:
 NOTIFICATION AREA MAP
 NOTIFICATION LETTER AND SITE PLAN
 ANY OTHER NOTICES, MEETING INVITATIONS, SIGN-IN SHEETS.
 LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN NOTIFICATION AREA.
 “INTERESTED PARTIES” LIST PROVIDED BY PLANNING DIVISION.
 “ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATIONS” LIST PROVIDED BY PLANNING DIVISION.
 LIST OF HOMEOWNERS ASSOC., REGISTERED NEIGHBORHOODS;
AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES WHO WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE
PLAN.
 NEIGHBORHOOD NOTIFICATION OF MAILING AFFIDAVIT.
 LIST OF ADDRESSES OF NEIGHBORHOOD NOTIFICATION LETTERS
WHICH WERE RETURNED, AND IF POSSIBLE, THE REASON FOR THE
RETURN.

NOTIFICATION AREA MAP

NOTIFICATION LETTER and SITE PLAN

NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SIGN-IN SHEET

*THIS PAGE WAS LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK*

NEIGHBORHOOD NOTIFICATION AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING

*THIS PAGE WAS LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK*

NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING

*****************************************************************************************

NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING

PLANNING DIVISION

AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING

Case No.______________________

Project Name: __________________

___ Planning Commission
___ Glendale City Council

I, _______________________________, being first duly sworn upon oath, state that
on the ______day of______________, 20___, I posted ___________________hearing
notice(s) for hearing date_____________________________.

Applicant/Representative Signature:

STATE OF ARIZONA

SS.
COUNTY OF MARICOPA

Subscribed and sworn to before me this ________day of_________________, 20___.

_______________________________

Notary Public
My Commission Expires:

___________________________________
07/24/24
ZON24-03 & AN261
6
07/24/24
Meghan Liggett
9/26/24; 8/13/24; 10/22/24
X
X