Minutes-PC 1976/08/10e ~-
• ~
JOItJ1 C01•111UN1 fY Rf:pEVELOPM(:NT ::~1~"MI5SION, PLANNI r!G C011'~1~51UN nr,o r'RUJL'C~C
NtEA COMMITI'E:C ME~:TiNG OF' r1UGUST IU, 19/G
PRE5ENT: COMt1UNITY fiEbEVFL01'Mf:NT COMMISSIONERS :
PIIL•'SEPJT : PLl1NN I NG CQMM I S5 I ON MEt1(~f RS ;
PItFSENT; PItOJECT' l1RE:l1 C0~IMITTEE ML.ME3E'RS;
Pi,,.~ENT: S1'AFF:
D~iy, Ulnndorf . FrY, Mc~rris, Mu~~~c
Hcr•ht~t, Kin~.l, Mc,rlcy
ltutilun'c, Clark, Eichrocl[,
kne~elbrecht, Lind, Lce, Newk(rk,
p,~y,in, Renner, Stockwel l ,
Warcle, Woods
Hlurotk, Contrcr.is, D'Ur~~o,
~'arn~ild, Ford, Noaker, Pren<ler-
g.ist, Slaugh[er
Th~~ meeting ~•ras c~~llad to order at. 7:15 P•M• ~Y ~Ji lli~im Plorris, Chairrn,in
M••. Morri~s thu~~ announced Ch~~t the Project Are~i Conxni t~ec ~~~ould present i[s prc~p~~;ed
plan and Mr. Andy Oeneau of thc Herit~ge Soc.fety v~~uld pYr,sr_nt a pictorial history
of early Anaheim. Prior to thc~e two presenl~t ions, Mr. M~~rris requcsled Mr. Fc~rn,ild
to revlew the results of thA recent questionnai re survcy.
STAFf' PRESENTl1TION:
Mr . Ferna' <I d i scu5sed khe re~su 1 ts of the or i g i na 1~i8 quesC i onn ~ i re ~ vs khe new
qu~stio~~naire survcy, which are remarkal+ly simi lar, Mosl people were contr~~dictory
in their remarks, statinc~ that thcy wcre stron ~ly in favor of residential prescrva-
tion, but also were in favor of ~~ ~ood, strong commercfal develop~7~ent. It ~~ould
seem that 4ie need to reach a compromise betwee.n t{iese twa factors. In yeneral,
the questioris resulted in the f'ollowing conclusions: 165 l0 101 for preserving
residentfal neighborhoods; 153 W~re For mor~e eoinmerci7l, with restaurant~,
neighborhood shoppin~, specialty shops, offices, etc. Re~l~r~{ing cc~mmercial inten-
sit.y, it was felt there should be buildings of 1-3 stories, with a few eigl~t story
bui ldings; 123 were against industrial usc dovmtown; 145 ~~~erc for parks, .:ornmun-
ity areas close to residential and green 5elts , etc. The historical ~ark wa. not
favcred; the spacc oark was not wanted; more night-time ackivities were stron9ly
urged. Alignment oF Lincoln to Charr.res was not Favored; li7 to 23 wera for main-
tai~in9 Lincoln in its present location.
Mr. Fernald then asked fur questions on the survey and 11r. Fred Brown asl<ed i f tl~c
questionnairc results wouid have any bearing on the eventual adoption oF a plan.
Mr. Fernald replied that the questionnaire survey would .ert~inly have its plar.c
along with th~; ~ublic input from [he meetings in considcr~tion of a final pl~n.
Mr. Ei~hr~,,it ~~4.ed if lhr. questionnaires appeared to resull in the same answars
i f they raere gleaned from Che same areas . Mr . Fernald repl i ed thac th i s~•~as not
clear at this p~int, bul Chat this type of in formation could be tabulated if needed.
Mr. Morris then c~mmented on the questionna,ire survey, statiny that it ~•rould hc
of value to the Commission in its delibcrations. t1r. Morris then requestcd
Mr. Gerald Bushore to present the Project area Committce proposed plin,
PRESENTATIO~ OF PROPOSED PI~C P~AtJ:
Nr. Bushore commented on the makeuN of the Pt~C mernbershio, and then wenf or, to
state that memb~rs felt the plan they were p resenCin~~wou-d bc of [he most benafic
to cveryone• It is a general land use plan only, wit.h ycner~l artf>.rial Strcet
patterr shown. Road alignments are not speeific. There arc no green b~:lt ar~~as
sho~,~n. 7Fie possible locations of Ci ty Hal 1 and Vi ll~g~: CenCer f'roject t~~i ! 1 n<~t
be shown. Mr. Bushore stressed Chat any plan being presf:nted must be ~E~proved
' throuyh a ser i es of pub I i c heari ngs and go to the Redeve lopment A9ency For' F i n;i I
voCe. 11r. Bushore then reviewed each section of thc map with rcgard to commerci~il
~nd residenti~il, pointin9 out those which were the same as the original slaff
Flan and which diffcred. Lincoln Doulevard was shown rr~iligned to the n~~rth, with
;he center are~ tl'~e sa~re as the staFf plan, but Che curved areas on each side
slightly difFerent. One oF the main differenc.es w~s the change of the [1-1 ~rea
from ccmmercial to residential. Comment was madc by Mr. Du~hore [hat it wis fclt
that thi~ area (D-I) would probaUly go cor~imercial in laler years. Tlie ~e~~lii)nmenC
a( ~.incoln is sugc~ested for the purpose of obtaining larger parcels for conniercial
• de.ve!opment. There was considerable d~sc~ss ion rey~rding Lincoln Qoulevard ~i~~ tc~
its realignmPnt vs maintaining it in its present lucat,ion. It ~•i~~ felt tt,it
it ~;rould no[ be plausible to try to seC up a sma~ler vers+on of Lincoln at il~
present location and bu~ld a larc7c:r thorouc~hfare to the north, since it ~•~~s felt
that traffic would flov~ via the m~jor boule vard anJ iqnc,re the smaller street.
~,[.c. ~/a„~ ' ~ hd,c~, /~ ~1G .
~ ~n-~ ~ ~x~4~ .
~,.~r~~ ~~r,,,~,.a.-~•~' ,~a.~..~a-~
.
• u ~
Of tlic 20~ acres involve~l in Che ftedevelo{~inent Prc~joct ~lph~~, a(~proximitr.ly
1/3 nre camnercic~l, 1/3 strects ~ind I/3 residenti~~l.
Mr. ~~ive Collins commented lh~it: hc tliou~ht the Pl1C pl~n was a gi~~nt step U,~cko~ar~~~
~ind ~~sked if a votc cc~ulcJ be t~~k~n c~n ~~n altcrn~~livc pl.~n as well. lli~rc v~ns
discussion r~~,yardinq thc "con~.en~sus" plan which had bcen t.ihlcQ at a pr'evic~u5
mcref i ng.
h1r. Cl~~ude Pomf.roy cotimunted on thr. frce enrcrprise ~rr.a ~~f r^~~~~velopm•~nt, ~~',
that ~:ven i f.~) I yroups prc.snnt agrcc on a plan, i f E t is not accc~~~!~~e ~'~ ~~rf vnte
~evc•lo~~rs it wi I I f;~i 1. t1r. Pomeroy then uuesCiuned thr, status of the ex-
clu~,ive right to negot!~itc a,yr~~r,menls which arc pr~~sumably (n efPect. 11r. Fcrn~~ld
,repl icd that thcrc h~d bcen sumc dclays on lh~~~c agrcements ~in~l lh~C they h~d
on ly hcen s i ~ned i n June a~~d wcrc i n c~f fect for s i x mon kh~, f ru~ ~ that dakc .
Mr. Dou~lis Renner, a memher of thc Projer,t Arc~i Cc~mmittea, thei~ requesteci lh~
~,~,~,~rt~~nir,y to rr.~d ,~ stal~:ment rcgardiny his fcclin~s on t.he ~~l~n beiny prescriY.ed
in thc nan,~ of the PAC. In essen~a, Mr. Renncr stateci firmly that he Is in f<~vor
of the. oriyinal coneept plan and not in favor of the redirection.
Th~~ similarities of the PAC plan and the Cabled "consen~sus" plan werc p~inted ouC.
A represr.ntative of D.A.7.A. state~ that they Y~auld h~e willin~ to accept the
PAC plan, and urycd a vote ror Che land use paCtern as ouClined in the PAC plan.
Mr, Collins ~uggested that the group accept the streeC pattern as being consistent
in all plans and ccmcenkrate on thc land uses, tal<ing a votc~ on tl~ree choi ces:
the P,~C plan, the original concept plan, or neither.
Mr. leitau, representing A.L.P1.A. spoke on thc PAC plan, stating that his gi..up
did not want a realignment of linr.oln or Anaheim Boul~~~,~rds; hc suygested a~me
way pattern for Lincoln and k3roadway.
Ch~irm~,n Morris lhen asked f~~r a show of hands on the thrce plans, which resulted
in; Original plan - 30; PAC plan - 56; neither -~S• Mr. Slaugliter of th~
City Atlorney's office stated a~ain that such a vote was infoi•mationil on ly with
regard to p~~blic input and would not be binding.
There was additional discu~sion with regarcl to City Hall ancl thc circulat ion
patter•n. It wes suggested that ther~. be a show of hands with regard to re-
alic~nment of Lincoln Boulevard, whici~ resulked in: For - 51; ~9~~nst - 27•
11r.Collins commented on the need to replace most of Che buildings on Lincoln be-
cause of earChyuake danger; only one or two bui ldings would be the exception.
Relocation of the streer.s would make it possibl~e to assemble enough re~il estate
to redPVelop the whoie downtawn; this is 4rhat we need. We need to do i t in a
dramaticway, which would begin with the relocation oF lincoln.
Another sh:,w of hands was taken to indicate those who wanted Lincoln Boulevard
left in it~s present location, which rPSUItF•d in: For - left as is -~i~+; For
realignment - 44. CF~airman Morris asked ha many people in the yroup owned
property facing Lincoln; a number of hands werce raised, I~ut no exact counC was
laken. Mr. Fernald commented with regard to leavin~ Lincoln in its pre~ent
' location, which wo~~'d necessit~~te widening it and woulcl require the use oF
property on one side ur the other and would ta~e approximatcly one y~~~r to
accomplish; it is important to recognize that business cannot function with this
type of activity going on. Mr. Fernald also {~ointed out the need to coincide
private projects wi th public uti I i ty projects.
Mr. Dave Richardson then presentecl and discussed an outline of a plan 4~!~ich h~:
proposed.
FiISTORICAL PRESENTATION:
Mr. Andy Deneau then presented a slide shawing of early Anaf~cim residents and
buildin5s and commented with regard to preservatiun of historical landmarks.
AOJOUitNMEN7:
Mr. Morris announeed that the group would meer ,~~i~in on Thursday to a~~rive at
conclusions. Tlie meeting was then aJjourned ~~f IU:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitied~
~ , -
:, / ; .-- , , ~° _
Nelen Ford, Secretary
l, n_ ll MICROFILMING Sf.RVICE, IN(;.