RA1964/03/24REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
March 24, 1964 (10:00 A.M.)
PRESENT: Mr. Krein, Mr. Dutton, Mr. Chandler, Mr. Schutte and
Chairman Coons.
ABSENT: None
PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: Keith A. Murdoch.
CITY ATTORNEY: Joseph Geisler.
PLANNING DIRECTOR: Richard Reese.
SECRETARY: Dene M. Williams.
MEMBERS OF URBAN RENEWAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE PRESENT:
Mr. Harry I. Horn, Chairman
Mr. J. W. DeDapper
Mr. Morris Martinet, Jr.
Mr. James L. Morris
Chairman Coons called the meeting to order.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting held February 25, 1964, and
adjourned regular meeting held March 3, 1964, were approved on
motion by Mr. Chandler, seconded by Mr. Schutte. MOTION CARRIED.
(Mr. Dutton abstained from voting as he was not present at meetings
noted above).
INTRODUCTION: Attendance of eight Boy Scouts representing Troop 16,
working for Civic Merit Badges, was recognized by Chairman Coons.
Chairman Coons announced that the purpose of the meeting
was to receive an explanation from a member of the firm of Victor
Gruen and Associates, as to the extent of the proposal considered by
the Urban Redevelopment Committee and recommended to the Redevelopment
Agency.
Mr. Reese introduced members of the firm of Victor Gruen
and Associates: Mr. Frank Hotchkiiss, D rector of Planning, Mr. Ralph
Martin and Mr. Jerry Pollack.
Mr. Hotchkiss, 135 South Downey Drive, Beverly Hills,
California, addressed the Agency advising that the City staff and
members of the Advisory Committee have already performed a great amount
of work and research on this matter.. According to his understanding,
there are two questions now to be considered, and first, does the City
want to take vigorous action of any kind to try to improve the future
potential of the center -city area?
Mr. Hotchkiss stated that if this is a question, the alternatives
should be considered, and the big alternative was to do nothing, which
approach might some day lead to a future massve acquisition and demolition
program in the center -city area.
Improvement in the center-city area will require a definite
program. To provide the desired results of a program would be a
combination use of the City staff, with their intimate knowledge and
understanding of this City's problems, and their firm with the knowledge
and experience obtained by working out many diversified problems in other citiE
Mr. Hotchkiss felt it important to note their philosophic
orientation to this type of a problem, which is as follows:
(2)
Redevelopment Agency, Mar 24. 1964 - Continued:
1. That a healthy center area is vital to the entire City.
2. Potentials and proper functions of a central area are best provided
for by high intensity and wide variety of uses.
3. Revitalization requires close cooperation between city government
and private enterprise.
4. Consideration of a wide area, actually including the entire city and
region.
5. Flexibility of program as to how private and public investments can
be made.
6. Differences of cities.
Mr. Hotchkiss advised that the program would be divided into
three parts; familiarization, exploratory planning, and plan refinement
and finalization. That the policy decisions of the plan remains that of
the Agency, and the plan is designed accordingly.
The other question of the Agency, appears to be whether or not
in making a decision on the employment of a consultant, the City would be
committed to an urban renewal and federal aid program. Mr. Hotchkiss
explained that in their surveys all alternatives will be considered in
their recommendations. He noted the many methods, and combination of
methods that might be employed to accomplish the desired results. He
further advised that their philosophy was,that if the results can be
obtained without condemnation, without demolition and without a federal
program, it should be accomplished without these avenues of recourse.
Slides of some of the cities in which Victor Gruen and Associates
have been active in redevelopment and revitalization were shown. Mr.
Hotchkiss reported that almost every sizeble city has a revitalization
program of their downtown area, and each city program differs from the
other.
Methods of revitalization and diversities of approach were
explained by Mr. Hotchkiss and Mr. Pollack, as pictures of areas of
redevelopment in many cities were shown. Among them were:
Green Bay, Wisconsin
St. Paul, Minnesota
Fort Worth, Texas
Syracuse, New York
Patterson, New Jersey
Kalamazoo, Michigan
Fresno, California
Urbana, Illinois
Sidney, Australia
Cincinnati, Ohio
Redondo Beach, California
Mr. Krein asked if prior to making these studies, were there
indications of interest on the part of private developers, or had the
cities in most cases determined to use federal or state funds.
Mr. Hotchkiss replied that this situation varied, and in some
cases private investors took the leadership, and in other cases cities
took the leadership, and private interest came later. In their experience
they have found that the most uncomfortable situation to a developer, was
not to have a clear indication or a strong impression of the city's intent.
Mr. Krein asked if the survey was made, and a delay of development
occured for four or five years, would the plan require changes?
Mr. Hotchkiss answered "yes", and further advised that the plan
must be flexible to meet this condition, and that they endeavor to draw
plans that can implement changes. However,there must be strong leadership
to accomplish the program.
(3)
Redevelopment Agency, March 24, 1964 - Continued:
In answer to Mr. Dutton's question concerning the area of the
plan, Mr. Hotchkiss reported that the survey would be concentrated on
the center -city area (approximately 600 acres) but will include the
balance of the city triangle, particularly the traffic pattern.
Mr. Chandler asked what the chances where in creating an atmos-
phere for a land assembly and development in an area where land values are
higher than other outlying available land.
Mr. Hotchkiss felt that chances were good, that the difficulty
would not be because of land cost, but failure to obtain cooperation or
agreement on the part of the land owners. He further stated that the
center -city area must be made equally or more desirable than the outlying
areas referred to, and many advantages are already present; such as the Civic
Headquarters, diversity of land use, and probable maximum concentration of
population. To accomplish this, will require improvement of traffic cir-
culation and perhaps new public facilities such as streets, etc. All these
factors must be considered in the survey.
Mr. Murdoch asked how the economic factors were taken into considera.
tion during the changeover period, and how use of a building prior to com-
pletion of the program was a - ,complished.
Mr. Hotchkiss replied that in some cases the use of a building
is permitted until demolition is required. However, a better solution would
be to secure an interim use for the land, such as surface parking until such
time as garage structures are required.
noted:
Discussion was held by the Agency, and the following expressions
Mr. Krein was of the opinion that the expenditure of the required
$59,000.00 for the survey should not be made until there is evidence of
interest.
Mr. Krein noted the necessity of leadership, as previously mentioned
and advised that he was personally concerned about local leadership; some-
one who would be able to generate interest on the part of private investors,
should such plan be adopted.
Mr. Dutton felt there was a definite need to create an atmosphere
to attract development under the private enterprise system, and that this
could not be accomplished without a plan as a guide for development.
Mr. Chandler was of the opinion that the land values in the center
and outer areas of the city would never equalize, and unless there was a
showing of faith on the part of the city government, that the city will
attempt to aid a program for the downtown area, no change in the present
conditions will occur, as there must be the possibility of a return on an
investment before it will be made.
Mr. Coons was of the opinion that redevelopment could not be
accomplished without an over-all plan, as developers must be aware of the
over -all potential and long -range planning in order to economically justify
investments; that the price a developer will pay for land depends entirely
on the economic return.
Mr. Schutte favored the expenditure of the funds for the survey
if assurance could be obtained that it would accomplish revitalization of
the downtown area. He noted the absence of the downtown property owners
whose problems they were endeavoring to solve, and felt that the proposal
was in need of additional study before Council action is taken.
Mr. Coons noting the difference of opinions expressed, stated
that an issue as important to the city as this should not be decided either in
favor or against on such an obviously close division of opinions, and agreed
that further study of the proposal should be made in an effort to bring the
Council in closer unanimity.
(4)
Redevelopment Agency, March 24, 1964 - Continued:
Mr. Schutte moved that the report be received and taken under advise-
ment and study for an additional thirty days. (There was no second to this
motion)
Mr. Axel Johnson, 230 East Fourth Street, Long Beach, California,
representing Del Webb Corporation, Developers, advised that he was present
at this meeting because they had an interest in the central area development.
He reported that they were the builders of a twenty -two story combination
office and hotel building in Fresno, and related the names of other cities in
which the Del Webb Corporation has an interest for possible development.
Mr. Johnson stated that the mental attitude of the Del Webb
Corporation was that of interest,if development can be accomplished without
federal aid, and if interest is shown on the part of the local people.
Mr. Johnson further felt that once a city has obtained at least
a preliminary plan that shows support in the future of the city, imagination
in the minds of developers as to projects and financing will follow.
In conclusion, Mr. Johnson stated, that as a developer interested
in the City of Anaheim, what was needed first was a plan on paper, pictures
and models to create the interest and support of the local people.
Mr. Schutte stated that this was the type of interest he had been
referring to, and requested a meeting with the representatives of the Del
Webb Corporation to discuss the issue.
Mr. Johnson was of the opinion that an informal meeting could be
arranged,and advised that he would check Mr. Webb °s schedule,that perhaps
a meeting could be scheduled before Wednesday of next week (April 1, 1964).
Mr. Dutton was of the opinion that interest on the part of a
developer had been expressed, and further delay on the part of the Redevelop-
ment Agency was unwarranted.
On motion by Mr. Schutte, seconded by Mr. Krein, the meeting of
the Redevelopment Agency was continued to April 21, 1964, 10:00 A.M., to
provide for a meeting with the representatives of the Del Webb Corporation,
and others if possible, to informally discuss what a plan would mean to a
developer and to the city.
Roll call vote was requested by Chairman Coons.
AYES: Mr. Chandler, Mr. Schutte, Mr. Krein and Chairman Coons
NOES: Mr. Dutton
ABSENT: None
Chairman Coons declared the motion carried.
ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Krein moved to adjourn, Mr. Chandler seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED. (12:15 P.M.)
SIGNED: ',�L
Secretary, Redevelopment Agency
1�